Ask The Professor Archives Part 11

---

Achieving Success with Lever-Power-Golf (LPG)

To succeed with LPG, there are no short cuts.   You must follow three steps.

O·    The first is knowledge.   That is a membership to the www.kuykendallgolf.com web site.  This provides scientific knowledge on physics, anatomy, kinesiology, neuroscience, fitness and nutrition.

O·    The second step is to purchase the LPG training kit. The kit provides you with training aids that can change your neuronal patterns. You cannot watch my videos and succeed. You cannot read the web site and succeed.   The brain establishes effective new neuronal patterns ONLY when YOUR body passes through correct positions on a weekly basis.  It is virtually impossible to make the changes without the LPG training aids.   Your brain only wants to do the patterns you have established.  It will hate the new patterns.   The LPG trainer has been called the device from hell.  It forces you to change your brain patterns.   Your brain, initially, will hate a correct motion – it has never performed one.

O·    The third step is support.   You can call, e-mail or send a video of your swing when you need assistance.

My goal is to make everyone his own teacher.   Golf mechanics are far too simple for the massive amount of incorrect information published.  If you can count to three and move your right arm, you can reach your potential as a golfer.  You need the LPG Kit to complete the learning process.  The site gives you knowledge and the training aids force you to swing correctly.  You can contact me anytime you need help.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

From Spelios:

Do you have a video detailing the Lever-Power Golf system (beyond the video clip)?  If so, could you provide me information about the video and its cost?

These two questions seem logical and the required answer, a simple "yes" or "no".   If yes, I could just send the videos and make a few dollars.

This would put me in the same class as all golf magazine's instructors with their quick fix tips (which must fail 100% of the time).   This would put me in the same class as the Leadbetter's, Harmon's, A.J. Bonner's, Dalton McCrary's, Dr. O'leary's, etc., (they all fail 100% of the time because of their instructions).  They may claim some success, but any achieved will be in spiteof their teaching.

However, a simple answer of "yes" and taking your $50 will guarantee failure.   After 16 years of study and testing, I have "perfected" golf mechanics and the "only" way for you to learn them.

There is a method of learning that has been labeled neurolinguistic programing (NP).   NP falsely states that some people learn better by vision, some people learn better by sound, and some people learn better by doing.

No one learns golf by vision.   You can watch any player you want and try to copy him, and the best you will do is look something similar (a gross similarity).  If just watching a video or DVD player worked, every amateur could look like Bobby Jones or Byron Nelson or Ben Hogan or Arnold Palmer or Jack Nicklaus or Tom Watson or Tiger Woods.

You can listen to someone telling you what to do and you will "NEVER" make an effective change in your golf mechanics.

There is one and only one way to improve and change your neuronal patterns for motion.  Your body must pass through the exact positions numerous times every several days for two years to make a permanent change.

Optimum Lever-Power-Golf (LPG) golf mechanics are laughably simple.   However, learning the simplest mechanics ever invented is no easier or harder than learning the most difficult method possible (the traditional pro swing).   The difference is that when you change from one traditional mechanics to another traditional mechanics, you will get worse and stay worse than the mechanics you are currently using.   The reason is that traditional mechanics, when optimized by amateurs, guarantees an average score of 97.   With LPG, you can change to mechanics that allow that number to be significantly lower.

Changing a mechanical motion and making it effective will require that you make a decision to let science lead you.

I have a three part program that, if followed, cannot fail.   Science does not allow for failure.

I'll explain my program to achieve success with Lever Power Golf in my next posting.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

From Dick:

I have spent thirty years attempting to perfect my golf swing.  By nature I am analytical and willing to work hard to achieve an objective.  Until now, I have never been satisfied with the results obtained after reading, watching and practicing the never ending stream of misinformation about the golf swing that the so called experts put out.

A few years ago I received an offer in the mail about the "Heard Super Swing" and was intrigued by the single axis concept.  I tried it for a while and while my swing improved it always felt somewhat unnatural.  Then I discovered "Natural Golf" and found a little better feel to my swing and some slight improvement in my ball striking but still felt that I was not achieving my full golfing potential.

About six months ago I searched the web for more information on the single axis golf swing and wound up at Scigolf's website.  I was surprised to learn that Jack Kuykendall was the brains behind both of the methods mentioned previously and had since gone on to discover the Lever Power Golf swing.  I watched his on line demo and something clicked in my head after a few minutes of watching.  I went to my car and pulled out a club and made a few swings.  It felt right to me so I drove to a practice range near my office and hit a bucket of balls with excellent results.

After work I walked nine holes with my wife and played better that I ever have in my life.  My wife has watched me experiment with new golf swings for thirty years and at first did not comment.  However, after several holes she admitted that I might have finally found something that worked.  By the end of nine holes she was convinced that this was definitely something different.

I was scheduled to play in a tournament the next day and took my new swing to the course to put it to the test.  Something I normally would never do without considerable practice and play but it felt so good and worked so well that I wanted to give it a try.  The first day I shot a 74 and wound up in the lower championship flight for the first time in my life.  The second and final day I wound up playing against a former club champion and shot a 71 to beat him by a stroke.  During the round he repeatedly complimented my ball striking and said he was not aware that I was such a strong player.  I used to score in the low to middle eighties but since making the switch to LPG I have not had a round out of the 70's.

I purchased Jack's video and feel that my game has definitely gone to another level.  This is not just my opinion but that of all the guys in my regular foursome.  We used to play even up but now they all want strokes.  I only wish I had found out about LPG years ago.
Thanks Jack!

Thanks for the email on your golfing success. I will post your email to the science web site.

Please send me an email if you have questions or need assistance with your golf swing.

Jack

---

From Brian:

In your personal opinions which is a better club?  A 5 or 6 year old set of Ben Hogan Apex H40's or a set of Tommy Armour 845s Silver Scot's that are about the same age?

All traditional clubs are assembled by traditional standards.  None of them have anything to do with science.  Many are designed to cure slices.  While many others are designed to cure hooks.  Few sold to amateurs are designed for a correct golf stroke.   There is no way to make any statement about traditional clubs except that they are not designed using optimum science.

Jack Kuykendall

---

From Ian:

This is the second question from Ian this week.  I gave a TIP answer to his first question. The TIP answer has ZIP, NADA, ZERO chance of helping his golf game.  No TIP can ever improve your golf mechanics.   The Brain does not work on TIPS.  I will continue answering questions, but you must remember that to make an effective change you need all the answers. You only get scientific answers by becoming a member of my web site: www.kuykendallgolf.com ($60 for the first year)

According to the book 'Search for the perfect swing' (Cochran and Stobbs) we are told that the clubhead actually loses speed once it passes the hands - particularly when the back of the left wrist breaks down.

Virtually everything in the Search for the Perfect Swing that has to do with stroke mechanics is incorrect. They believe in big muscles, centrifugal force and swinging on a single plane and a two-axis model.   All of these theories are scientifically incorrect.   One of their major mistakes is their incorrect assumption on the horsepower muscles can produce.  They are off by a factor of at least 2.   This is why they make the incorrect statement about big muscles being needed to produce high clubhead speeds.

The cocking and uncocking of the left wrist has virtually nothing to do with creating high clubhead speed.   It is just a motion that must be recovered from.   The cocking and uncocking of the left wrist is in a plane 90 degrees to the plane of the stroke.

Should we try to have the hands well in advance of the ball (and clubhead) at impact to ensure we deliver maximum speed?

With an iron, yes.  You need a divot.   With a driver, just slightly.   Power comes from straightening of the trailing arm lever and the rotation of the forearms.   You want the lever straightening and forearm rotation to square the clubface to occur at impact.

Really high speed swings appear to create a lot of clubhead lag in the downswing (Sergio) - in searching for more speed in our swings should we try to achieve this lag position or somehow hold off the release of this angle until late in the downswing?

This is one of the false beliefs of golf.   You do not need lag (a large angle between the left hand and left forearm).   You need for the trailing arm levers to have their correct angles at the correct time during the down stroke.   Lag is a term made up by traditional teachers because they see a large angle between the left wrist and left forearm with a traditional golf stroke.   It is just like excessive hip action.   Almost to a person, traditional teachers believe the hips are a contributor to clubhead speed.   Both notions are scientifically incorrect.

You really have no choice if you want to know scientifically correct information about the golf stroke.   You must become a member of my web site.   Am I the only person who has ALL the correct answers to the golf stroke.   The answer at this time in the history of golf is YES.   This is not ego or bragging.   It is a fact.   If you think that one person does not have all the answers, you are incorrect.   I do have all the answers.   Golf is not scientifically complex.   It is straight forward application of physics, anatomy, kinesiology and neuroscience.

Jack

---

From Patrick:

I remember in the spring reading about Jack's LPG swing being compared to a traditional swing and analyzed by a sports "expert" at a university in New Zealand to see which swing was more efficient, simpler, more biomechanically correct, etc.  As I recall the report was due out about now.  I haven't seen anything at Scigolf or Jack's website recently about this study.   Do you have any information?

Unfortunately, several of the participants did not perform the testing correctly.   They confessed to cheating about 30 days after the study.   The study is not presentable as a scientific paper due to their actions.  It was very expensive and time consuming for me.

I will post some of the study on the web site in the future.

Jack

---

From Ian:

Even though the torso and legs do not supply much speed to the swing - incorrect use of the body, particularly the shoulders seems to cause an 'over the top' action.

This is because golfers have been taught to rotate the lower body to start the downstroke e.g., Hogan. When golfers actually start the downswing with lower body rotation, the shoulders will follow.  It is lower body rotation that is the culprit, not the shoulders.  If you sit down, as Sam Snead did, the hands will go back and down and the shoulders will move correctly to support the arms.

Giving a very high and 'out across' right shoulder at impact with a swing path that is leftwards across the line (compared to your 10 degrees right impact path).

Why do the traditional gurus keep pushing such a symmetrical rotational action of the body where clearly the best swings have a much steeper shoulder action on the downswing and at impact.

To keep suggesting to do this seems ludicrous and ensures a continuing error.

Traditional gurus will never let facts get in the way of their theories.  Butch Harmon recently watched Ben Witter hitting shots around 300 yards while straddling a Swiss ball.  Harmon told Witter that he thought what he was doing was impossible because you cannot hit a ball that far without HIP power.  I can guarantee you that Harmon has not changed his mind!

Ben Witter hitting 300 yard drives
Not much lower body power in this swing!

Take a look at any stop frame shot at impact (from behind or side on) particularly Tiger and see how very steep or high the left shoulder is.

I know you want to have the shoulders square at impact but are they very tilted as well?

They are very tilted.  The tilt is close to the shoulder tilt at the address position.  As the right arm levers straighten and rotate and extend through impact, the right shoulder must move down along with the arms.  The left shoulder must also move up if the right shoulder is moving down.

Jack

---

From Graham:

Hi Jack,

I have serious shanking problem or I am striking the ball with the club face wide open.  I have been to my club pro for a lesson, when he is there I hit the ball O.K.  When I go to the practice area or the golf course to play or practice, it all seems to have gone.

I am a 12 handicap golfer and this really gets me down.  When it starts, I just want to pack up and go home.  Is there any advise you can give me to resolve this.

Graham,

Shanking is caused by hitting the hosel with any swing path or the toe of the club with an outside-in (slice) swing.  The most common is the hosel hit.

Traditional golfers have to move upward and backward during a swing.   When they do not time this motion correctly, they hit the hosel and shank.

LPG golfers (Single-Axis) golfers hit the hosel by standing too close to the ball.

The first thing you want to try in either system is get farther away from the ball.   There is always outward extension of the arms and club due to inertia.  You need to allow for this extension.  Start with the toe of the club behind the ball.  Make several swing and see what happens.   Experiment from too far away to too close.   The "too close" should produce the hosel shank.  The "too far" away should produce the toe shank.  Now, find the right distance for solid contact.

Jack

---

From Ian:

Why is the golf swing not like a flail - handle and swingle -  if there are no swingers (Ernie Els - pulling - left side) and no hitters (Craig Stadler - pushing - right side) -  what is the force or action that inacts the down or forward motion?

A detailed scientific answer is available for these three questions on the www.kuykendallgolf.com (membership $60) web site.   The answers below are one liners that detailed scientific analysis prove.

Why is the golf swing not like a flail - handle and swingle?

A flail timing is different from the timing of a golf stroke.

If there are no swingers (Ernie Els - pulling - left side)

Ernie Els does not pull with his left side.  Jack Nicklaus did not pull with his left side.   No right handed golfer pulls with his left side.   When you examine muscles and lever movement using science, you can easily see that no right handed golfer pulls with his left side.  On my web site, I show that Jack Nicklaus does 100% opposite of what he thought he did in the golf swing.   The greatest player in the history of the game did not do a single thing he thought he did!

and no hitters (Craig Stadler - pushing - right side)?

Craig Stadler pushing is on the right track but all the big muscle rotation of the body theories (Ballard, Leadbetter, Harmon) are incorrect.

What is the force or action that inacts the down or forward motion?

All golfers create the majority of clubhead speed with the straightening of the trailing arm lever and rotation of the forearms.  If you use LPG, the left arm can assist in creating greater clubhead speed.

Jack

---

From Ian:

Would you like to comment on any of the 'scientific theory' found in the Golfing Machine by Homer Kelley.  Is the science used correct or is the interpretation flawed.   There seems to be a revival of interest in his teaching and does any of his science or theory appear related to your work?

Nothing in the Golfing Machine is related to my work.

The traditional teaching establishment has so little science training that anything that is confusing is science to them.  The Golfing Machine has so much incorrect science that it would take too long to explain all of it.   I do not have the time or desire to prove something wrong that has already failed.  A lot of bad ideas and teaching methods never die in the golf industry.   The majority of teaching professionals never let facts get in the way of their theories.

Jack

---

From Bob:

So many golf balls on the market hard/soft -   spin/no spin -   straight-long -   $3/$1 a ball.  What ball should I use?

Because ball manufacturing companies never give scientific information, it is not possible to make any recommendation that the ball manufacturers are not making.  If the ball manufacturers gave lift, drag, and coefficient of restitution and curve information, it would be easy to select a ball.  Again, since they do not, you have no choice but to experiment.

I hit a 7 wood 200 yards, my 7 iron 150 yards, and my 48 degree wedge 115 yards.  I score between 82 - 95.

Try some of the balls designed for tour level distance.

A lower score depends on my short game.

Everybody's score depends on his short game.  Tour players scores depend on their short game. They miss 5 greens a round on average.   They get up and down 5 out of 5 time on three days and 4 out of 5 times on the fourth or they are not on TV on Sunday afternoon.

I cannot put backspin on the ball.

Yes you can.   You play on greens that are hard.   Tour player play on well watered green that allow for the ball to spin back on the green.   You do not see balls backing up at the British Open.

I hit it high.

Nothing wrong with high.  Nicklaus and Watson hit it very high.

I'm confused with all the marketing.

All golfers are confused with the marketing.

Jack

---

Before Jack left for a vacation I sent him an article on Scott Lephart's (University of Pittsburgh Neuromuscular Research Lab.) study of 82 golfers.  I asked Jack for his comments.  While Jack is away I'll summarize the study and offer some observations.  If you have any comments send them in and we'll see how ours compare with Jack's.

Lephart divided the 82 golfers into 3 groups based on their handicaps. He measured hip strength during abduction, in which the hip moves the legs out and away from the body.  Lower handicap golfers were stronger and more flexible in the measured hip movements.  Lephart concluded that hip strength is critical to hip injury prevention.  Further, he stated that improving strength and flexibility of the hips and torso can boost "torso velocity" and tack an additional 20 yards to a golfer's driving distance.

I suspect our own experiences with sports would confirm Lephart's conclusion that those with stronger hips will have fewer hip injuries.

How about the stronger the hips, the lower the handicap?  Aren't better golfers better athletes, and likely to be stronger and more flexible for any muscle group measured.

Do stronger hips boost "torso velocity" or do they provide a more stable platform to support high arm speeds?  Probably some of each. Jack's contention is the lower body contributes from 10% to 15% of the club head speed.  Jack bases this on a vector analysis of the swing.  In his vector analysis final velocity is deduced by vectorial addition of individual velocities.  Observation confirms this theory.

Another Jack (Nicklaus) says stronger legs are necessary for more distance because they provide a more stable platform for higher arm speed.

What do you think?

Don

---

From Ben:

I have 2 questions for you.  First of all about divots.  When I make contact with the ball almost every time I do not make a divot.  Is there a problem with my swing and is it a bad thing.

With a basic iron shot, you must have a divot.  This means you are striking the ball first and then the ground afterwards.  This allows for solid ball contact and correct backspin.  If you do not take a divot, the backspin can be very different from shot to shot and ball control will very difficult.

You need to force yourself to take divots when practicing.

Second you say that the club should travel inside to out and back through on a 10% path but I've noticed that on the alignment mat there are two marks are they both 10% or are they different.

Swing on the 10 degree inside to outside line.  The ball goes toward the big arrow (target line).

Thanks for all of your scientific knowledge of the game and for your dedication to making us all our own teachers.

Thank you, we'll keep trying!

Jack

---

From Bill:

This past weekend I finally got to play the Lever-Power-Golf DVD.   I really was impressed with the lesson.

I was somewhat close to the swing method but the DVD had me banging them straight and farther than before. I have new found confidence and look forward to taking on my foursome.   The only slight problem I'm having is hitting the ball too fat, i.e. plowing up a good tomato patch before striking the ball.   However with as much power the swing gives me I can still get some distance. When I don't hit fat (not so often) the white one goes a country mile.   Golf is getting a lot more fun now.

Fat shots usually occur from:

1.   Head rotation to see ball flight.   This lowers the right shoulder and the swing arc.
2.   Standing too close to the ball.   There is always some extension when you swing. If you are too close, you will hit fat.
3.   Breaking down of the left wrist before impact.   If the left wrist bends back toward the left forearm, this will lose the arc and cause fat shots.

Jack Kuykendall

---

From Gregg:

In regard to golf equipment what are your thoughts on the following?

1) Blades vs. Cavity back irons?

Answering the question will only confuse golfers.  The correct questions should be what is the optimum design for iron head.  It is a blade size with a low center of gravity and no bounce on any irons except the sand wedge.  There should be a 10 gram spread between head instead of the 7 grams of all manufacturers except Kuykendall Golf use.  They should be scientifically assembled for total weight, 1st and 2nd moments of inertia.  This means that every club feels and swings the same.  Clubs that are swing weight and frequency matched require a different swing and feel for every club.

2) I know you recommend longer club lengths to accommodate the 10 finger grip but in general would a shorter statue person (say 5'5" tall) be better off using the normal length clubs since these would be long for their height already?

I do not recommend longer clubs.  I want you to separate your hands and move your left hand up instead of your right hand down.  The club is the same length from your right hand.  It is just longer so the left hand has something to hold on to.

3) Graphite vs. steel shafts?

Graphite is superior.   There is no reason to play with steel.

4) The giant 400cc and over driver head sizes that seem to be erupting in popularity?

I explain that science on my web site.

5) That new R7 Taylor Made golf driver with it's adjustable weight system?

This is pure marketing hype and the last thing an amateur should be doing.  Adjusting weight to correct for swing faults means you NEVER change the swing fault.   You will have only one club that you can hit with your swing faults.  What do you do with the rest of your clubs?

Jack

---

From Hai:

Jack, what’s your opinion on Mike Austin’s secrets video?  He claims his club “casting” method will add 20-40 yards to anyone’s drive.  In his video, he claims to know the secrets to hitting it long.  I read a story about his famous 515 yard drive, at the age of 64 with a Wilson persimmon driver (10 degree loft, 43” long with an extra stiff shaft), during a golf tournament in Las Vegas.  I’m really curious as to how he hit it that far.  The environmental conditions that day were winds gusting up to 27 miles/hr (Guiness Book of Records estimated gusts at 35 mph), at an altitude of 2,030 ft and temperature of 88 degrees.  They estimate his swing speed at 150 mph and that the ball carried for 445 yrds and rolled for another 70 yrds.  Mr. Austin explains the trajectory as being low and level “the ball went up strangely.  Went out about 10 to 15 ft high… .”   The man’s stature is about 6’2”, 210 lbs.

Back to his secret swing, in the article in Travel & Leisure Golf mag (Jul/Aug ’04), it states, “What distinguishes the technique is a forceful lateral shift of the legs coupled with an unusual hand position and club swing…Austin relies on what conventional hitters might call “casting,” throwing the clubhead around the swing circle.”   From the look of the swing pictures, his hand grip is in the palm and he doesn’t look like he’s casting his hand just before impact.   In fact, Austin states he throws the club using an underhand toss.  Sounds familiar?   Anyway, your thoughts are appreciated.

Mike Austin's basic philosophy is big-muscles and body-rotation create high clubhead speed.  He believes that a casting rotation of the right hand at the start of the downstroke is the magic move that allows the big-muscles and body-rotation to creates clubhead speed.  HE IS 100% INCORRECT. 

Mike Austin is big man with extremely high clubhead speed.  A 150 mph clubhead speed cannot air carry a ball 445 yards.  The multiplier is a maximum of 2.4 times the clubhead speed.  With no wind and normal air pressure conditions, the maximum it will air carry is 360 yards.  A trailing wind would have to have added 85 yards and then the 70 yards of roll gave him the record.  The low to high ball trajectory would have actually taken air carry off the ball.  He would have hit it even farther had he had a higher launch angle.

Mike Austin makes the power move as good as any one in golf and produces high clubhead speed due to extremely high arm speed.  There are no exceptions to correctly applied physics.

A rotating body does not and cannot add more than a few miles per hour clubhead speed.  Body rotation at the start of the downstroke is the number one cause for the average score being around 100 and most amateurs having low clubhead speed.

Jack

---

From Jay:

I have had a long-standing debate with my friends regarding how high one could/does hit a golf ball. Under optimal conditions, could a very talented golfer hit a ball 100 yard high?

A professional golfer can hit a ball very high.   I do not know if it is 100 yards (300 feet).  Virtually no one hits a standard shot that high.  The only time you would want a high shot is to go over a very high tree or down wind.  Most trees are less than 100 feet tall.  Between 100 and 150 feet high is about as high most professionals will hit a shot.

Jack

---

From Michael:

Which information helps a club fitter more?
a) height from floor to wrist and the swing speed
or
b) a flight trajectory analysis that gives you vertical, ball spin, back spin, side angle, flight time, max height and total distance.

Michael,

None of the above are useful.  Traditional club makers have so many variables that it would confuse all golfers.  None of them have anything to do with science.

Science only needs the following:
1. Height and arm length to establish your address posture.
2. Clubhead speed.

Golf science is Physics 101.

Jack Kuykendall

---

From John:

I just wanted some clarification on why a lower lofted driver would produce more side spins than a higher lofted one.  If each head took the same path (let's say slightly out to in) into the ball, will the incremental back spin supplied by the higher lofted head partially negate the side spin (all else being equal) or what exactly occurs?

There is simply more side spin on any club that has less loft.

Jack

---

From Charlie:

I've been reading about Lever Power Golf and would like to find out about schools/instructors in the Knoxville, TN area - any help would be appreciated.

There are no instructors in your area.  The system is designed to allow you to become your own teacher.  Golf mechanics are laughably simple.  If you can count to three and move your right arm, you can reach your potential.  The teaching part is easy.  The hard part is on your side. You must perform enough repetitions to establish a new pattern.

Also, I came across an article about "Alternative Swings" which I found interesting and would like to hear your response. The link is: http://www.golfinsite.net/alternateswings.htm

This is a perfect case of someone who knows he is different and science does not apply to him.   This is such a classic of why he had to fail that I will post it to my web site and answer all his statements to show why every conclusion he arrived at is incorrect for anyone but him.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

From Brett:

Hi Jack,

I see Jim Furyk needs surgery on his left wrist wonder if his double overlap and "strong" left hand could have contributed to injury?

The type of grip Furyk uses definitely puts the major stress at impact on the left wrist.  However, it is not possible for me to make any statement about what caused his injury.

Jack

---

From Pete:

Jack,

I have problems hitting greens in regulation.  I can go to the driving range and hit the targets, but on the course I am missing greens from PW-7 iron distance.  I either push the ball to the right, miss left, hit short, or everything else but hit the green.   What is going on?

FEAR and alignment.  Virtually all amateurs align right and pull across their body when playing.  No matter what you do on the range, you will not align correctly on the course.  Part of my LPG kit is an alignment/practice mat that you use on both the range and the course.  This helps the alignment problem. Knowledge of the FEAR mode and how to achieve success is covered on my web site.  There are no TIP answers on to how to conquer the FEAR mode. You need the complete knowledge.

Jack

---

From Max:

Was there a constant relationship between Moe's right or left forearm and the clubshaft throughout his swing?

No. There cannot be a constant relation between the forearms and the shaft.  The right wrist has to hinge in order to produce power.  This automatically changes the relationship.

Jack

---

From Greg:

Hi Jack,

1)  I have seen many of the top golf instructors on the golf channel such as Dave Pelz, David Leadbetter, Butch Harmon, Jim McLean, Dean Reinmuth, and Rick Smith and have wondered why none of these guys are playing on the Senior or Champions Golf Tour?  Not sure if any of them ever played on one of the tours but most of them seem to be very highly skilled in their golf game.  Are they lacking in one or two aspects of their game (i.e. putting, bunker play...etc)?

Playing and teaching are totally different.

Teaching, for the above instructors, is their perceptions of the mechanics of tour players. Each one of them have a slightly different perception.  All of them teach scientifically non-optimum mechanics.

Playing is having the world class coordination of the tour players, all day practice and conquering of the FEAR mode.  None of them have the coordination's and perhaps the desire to practice all day to never being able to play at the tour level.

They get a lot of media recognition and make big salaries while never helping any golfer actually improve over what he could do with any traditional instructor.  The public in general and the golfing public in particular believe anything a media promoted celebrity says.

2)  How do you think a young and in peak Moe Norman would fair on today's PGA tour?

With a mentor to take care of the public communication, he would be the most dominant player the golfing world ever witnessed.  It is simply a matter of statistics.  Moe was around 85% accurate with fairways and greens in regulation.  Current tour players are around 70% accurate.  A 15% statistical advantage cannot be overcome.

3)  What are your thoughts on the golf techniques of some of these past golf legends?

With the exception of Jack Nicklaus, they were all self taught.  They mimicked the swings of other players and they developed their own idiosyncratic style.  All of them played with scientifically non-optimum mechanics.  They were all great players because they learned how to score.

I will list the optimum and the non-optimum mechanics of each player.

A) Bobby Jones
Non-optimum:  Straight left arm -- feet too close -- left hand on top of the club -- hands to close to body -- too much body rotation -- too much foot action -- belief that hips and body rotation created power.
Optimum: Created clubhead speed with his arms.  Made a great back and down power move with his arms at the start of the downstroke.  Excellent extension of the right arm levers and rotation of the forearm through impact.

B) Ben Hogan
Non-optimum:  Straight left arm -- fast jerky tempo -- too much lower body rotation -- initially when he was a snap hooker of the ball, he had his left hand on top of the club -- belief that power comes from the lower body (hips and knees).
Optimum:  Wide stance - became a dominant player when he moved his left hand to align with the club face - flat swing - one of the best at the back and down power move with the hands and arms - Excellent extension of the right arm levers and rotation of the forearm through impact.

C) Sam Snead
Non-optimum:  Straight left arm -- left hand on top of the club -- excessive lower body and hip rotation -- belief that a pulling action with the left arm and body rotation created power.
Optimum:  Sit down power move at the start of the downstroke (right knee went to the right).   This one move guaranteed that the clubhead would have maximum speed and be on the correct path to the ball. Created power and accuracy with his arms.  Excellent extension of the right arm levers and rotation of the forearm through impact.

D) Jack Nicklaus
Non-optimum:  Straight left arm -- left hand on top of the club -- excessive lower body and hip rotation -- excessive foot action -- backstroke pulled left heel off ground -- belief that big muscles create power.
Optimum:  Excellent sit down power move at the start of the downstroke.  Excellent use of arms to create clubhead speed.  Excellent extension of the right arm levers and rotation of the forearm through impact.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's # 1 Scientific Teacher

---

From Steve:

Your response to "Tour Tempo" seemed a bit confusing.  If the reason for a slice is that my hips open early, then if I speed up my downswing and it is now in synch with my hips won't that produce a straighter ball?  Even if it goes straight right that can be corrected with stance.  I would think that bringing the backswing, downswing and the rest of my body into sync would be very important to hitting the ball correctly.  What am I missing here.

You are missing my point.  Just having tempo can never make incorrect mechanics correct.  They are just as bad with tempo.  No incorrect mechanics will ever be corrected just because of tempo.

This is why "TIP" teaching always fails.  This is why all the golf magazines are still in business.  Ninety % of golfers think that they just need that one little change and they will be better golfers.  It has failed since golf became a game, and it will always fail because the sciences of physics, anatomy, neuroscience and kinesiology prove it does not work.

The magazines will never change and the Golf Channel will never change because their audience is the 90%.  They understand your lack of knowledge and make a great living using you. My market is the 10% who are ready for science.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

From Joe,

Hi Jack,

A new book, "Tour Tempo" claims and reports on scientific observation and testing that a 3/1 time ratio in tempo is present for best golf.  Summary: the back swing takes 3 times longer than the down swing. Film frames are used in study.  Frames are .033/sec each (30 a second) and a typical excellent tour swing would be 27 fames for back swing and 9 for down swing.  The book claims that Hogan was 21/7, Tiger was 27/9 in 1998 and now swings at 24/8.  A CD with tones is in book to study tempo speed timing.  The author claims most golfers swing too slow, especially on their back swing.

Could there be any value here for working on tempo (rhythm speed) for LPG?

Joe, This is the worst kind of TIP.  It is another one of the useless tips that can make you believe that if I just get my tempo right, I'll play better golf.  TIPS never work.  The brain does not work on TIPS.  If you have a slice swing and you change your tempo, you still have a slice swing with a different tempo.  No one motion can ever make a golf stroke correct.  One incorrect motion can produce results you do not desire.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

From Eric:

I will be taking up golf this summer and will get your LPG course - it makes the most sense to me as an engineer since I'm learning from scratch.

It is a three step process.  First, you need to become a member of the web site in order to obtain correct scientific knowledge.  Second, you need to purchase the LPG kit.  This allows you to become your own teacher.  Third, you can call or e-mail when you have questions.

Because of my limited budget (what my wife and I have agreed on), I'll get clone clubs from Pinemeadow Golf (like you, I'm not interested in buying the highly marketed stuff to pay for Tiger's new Mercedes!).  I've selected the Oxygen Type S Irons, the Acer XP Titanium driver, and the Acer XP 3&5 woods.  The putter I'll get from Scigolf.  In a few years I'll upgrade to the MaxImpact irons and woods.

I took a look at the site.  These are just knockoffs of major brands.  They are usable.  There are no special features in the clubs over any other knockoff head.

My main question for you is: Can the grips be installed by me or do I need to take it to a shop?   If I can do it, are there detailed instructions?  Also, before I order the clubs, what should I ask about lengths since the grips require 2" more (e.g. is their online fitting method accurate)?

You can add my grips to the clubs.  If you are not proficient at club assembly and modification, I would suggest that you take it to a custom clubmaker.  It is not difficult.  It just requires that you know what you are doing.  I don't have detailed instruction on the site because it causes too much trouble when golfers are not experienced in club assembly.

If you are familiar with Pinemeadow, which clubs are somewhat close to MaxImpact so I won't have too much sensory relearning when I upgrade?

There is no comparison with any traditional clubs and MaxImpacts.  You will have to change your sensory learning when you make the change.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

From Keenan:

What is your take on Burrows golf and their Powersphere technology?
http://www.burrowsgolf.com/home.asp

All competitive driver heads are close to the COR allowed and still be legal.  Nothing will make a ball go farther due to cosmetic design.

Jack

---

From John:

My buddy has a computer program called v 1or d 1, something like that.  It is used with swing videos to check swing plane, etc.   95% of the great players have swings that stay within the plane on the back and down swings.  When I looked at my LPG swing on the computer, my swing didn't quite fit into the plane throughout.   It would be in the plane some, but not always.

Question: Do you give credence to the swing plane theory?

It is scientifically impossible to swing a two-axis system on a single plane.  When you take a traditional two-axis grip, body parts move on five planes.  There are no single planes swings and NO, and I do mean NO great player ever had the same plane on the backstroke and downstroke.  You can set cameras at various angles and pick out a few points where parts of the club cross a plane.  This is a standard ploy of nonscientific perceptions.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

From Charles:

I have a unique situation that I hope you may have a solution for.   I played respectable "weekend warrior" golf from '86 to about '95-96.   I had a handicap around 20, which wasn't too bad for a guy who'd been missing his right hand and forearm from birth.   I played with a self made brace on my right arm which allowed me to "grip" standard left handed clubs and "push" the club thru impact.

I finally quit playing in '96 when the MS I'd been diagnosed with in '90 had weakened my legs and screwed up my balance enough that I couldn't practice very long and couldn't break 100.   The fun of golf was gone.   About that time I started looking at Natural Golf, and even drove down to a resort in the Chicago suburbs to pick the brains of a number of Natural Golf instructors who were attending a sales meeting there.   I have a feeling that this was right after you were driven out, but of course I didn't know anything about that.

Anyway, I didn't get much help and ultimately gave up the idea.   I'm now chomping at the bit to play again, and think single axis golf makes the most sense for me.   My legs have stabilized (although I still walk with a cane or use a scooter) and I'm taking an experimental MS treatment that may make them much stronger.   Even if that doesn't work, a number of the Milwaukee county courses have a single person golf cart that lets a person with a disability play.   So, I need to learn to play SA golf, modify or replace the brace, modify my clubs or buy new ones, and get back on the course.   I'm fully employed and not looking for a handout.

Do you think you can help, and if so, are you interested in doing so?

There are several ways I can help you.   As the body is only a stabilizer, it is not really needed to play good golf.   I can modify a hitting stool for attachment to a cart and you would be able to play while sitting on the stool.   I could also design a strap system for securing you to the golf cart while swinging.

In addition to the above, if insurance money were available, a program could be established that could optimize your exercise and golfing needs.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

From Gerry:

I am very interested in your swing method but live my golf life on a shoe string budget.  I have never had much luck with videos and training aids (CG ) of course so that may explain it.

This is why most golfers have given up on traditional training aids and videos.  You have to fail with them.  Neither the videos or training aids teach what actually happens in an effective golf stroke.

My question is what is the bare minimum required to start your system?

The starting place is always correct scientific knowledge. That is a membership to my web site--
www.kuykendallgolf.com

Is the video enough with my current clubs?

Neither the site or the video are enough.  They only give you correct scientific knowledge.  You can install my grips on your current clubs (Unless they are Natural Golf clubs -- which are useless) and play LPG successfully.  When your budget allows, you should consider my clubs -- they take your consistency and distance to a new level.

Do I have to buy big grips or will my regular grips work well enough to test the system?

One grip comes with the training kit.

Are the training aids a necessity?

The LPG kit is not only necessary, it is virtually impossible to learn without the kit.  This is explained in detail in the neuroscience section which explains how the brain builds new patterns.

Are the video and training aids enough to learn a good repeatable swing or will personal instruction be required?

98% of my customers learn the system on their own.  Less than 2% take a lesson or come to a 3-day school.  A lesson can make the initial process easier.

Do you ever make any instruction trips out west?

Not at the present time.  I am very selective about the instructors that I certify.  That is why I only have four around the country.   They must be able to teach the system correctly.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

From Jerome:

Hello Jack,

I'm a 54-year-old dentist with a 6 handicap aspiring to become scratch.  Having traveled the route of conventional golf via Jimmy Ballard, Golf Digest School, Golf Machine and many others I never improved beyond a 12-14 handicap.  I started Natural Golf about 4 years ago and improved to a 6 and been there ever since.  After signing up for your web site, using your LPG kit, buying your clubs (awesome) I know that with your system I will easily reach my goal.  With patience in mind for change, I began playing to high 80's for the first 2 weeks and after 4 weeks I'm back to a 6 and improving daily.  I shared my excitement with my club pro who played on the mini tour and is a + 1.  He made fun of my folding left arm and the system.  I therefore challenged him to a one on one no handicap 18 hole match on Aug.1 2004.  That will give me a total of 5 months with LPG as I started on March 1 of 2004.  At my rate of improvement I may have to spot him a stroke.  The event (as its turning out to be) is called Average Jerome LPG-5-months versus Bryan Conventional-Golf-25-years.  I look forward to your 2nd LPG outing in June to help fine-tune me.  I've got a film crew to video the event and with a little luck (not much) I look forward to winning.  Currently, I'm performing the Iron-Law-Drills or slow motion swings with the trainer on a daily basis.  Although you developed a simple system it does take time for change.  To get to a scratch level in about 5 months or less is incredible.  Thanks for your time and knowledge.

The e-mail above is from a new LPG user who has challenged his Pro to a match.  There is going to be a big party surrounding the event.  The Pro, according to Jerome, has a good sense of humor and believes this will be a fun competition for the members.

Both players will be trying to win.  However, this is a fun event and is not being promoted as an endorsement for LPG or traditional golf.  It is just a club member who believes in himself enough to challenge the Pro.  We all know what can happen in a one round challenge.  Both of them can have good rounds and one will win by a stroke.  One can have a poor round and lose by a big number.  Both can have a poor round and the one who keeps grinding will win.  In any case, it is the golf-challenge that will make this event exciting.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

From Pedro:

Jack, I respect all the science and information you provide.  I often check on your site as a reference.  Anyway I ran into a system called swing sync in which all the irons in the set truly have the same frequency within 1CPM of each other.  The site is www.swingsync.com.  Can you take a look and give me your thoughts?

Pedro, I do not need to visit the site.  Frequency matching has been around for over 20 years.  This means that all the shafts have the same flex.  It is good a quality control measure.

What is really important is total weight, 1st and 2nd moment of inertia balancing.  This means all the clubs feel the same when you hold them and swing them.  Frequency matching has nothing to do with correct balance.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

From Chuck:

Hi Jack--

I'm interested in your unique perspective on what enabled Phil Mickelson to win the Masters.  Here are my guesses--

1.   tamed the fear factor and modified putting stroke to significantly improve putting

2.   mastered the power fade for controlled driving

3.   impeccable mastery of his wedge distances and knowledge of the course to win with the wedge

4.   changed course management--- dual strategy= when to be conservative, when to be aggressive vs. old strategy=go for it almost exclusively

5.   luck/divine intervention, particulary on the last putt --  having President's Cup teammate Chris DeMarco show him the line

So in my view (guesses) --  he improved his putting, wedge play, driving and "head", and he didn't have to worry about Tiger, just Ernie Els.  Boy, Phil M. played a great, great back nine under pressure.  I await your scientific view and thank you in advance for your answer.

The scientific view is simple.  Phil Michelson decided to win and even more important, set his mind where he refused to lose.  He stated in a post interview that when he knew he was 2 behind Els that he was figuring out what he needed to shoot to win.  What he was not doing was thinking,   O Sh--!, I've choked again. All the other things you mention above contributed to him having this frame of mind.  I'm sure more can be added to the list.

It is that "thing" that makes golf the great game that it is.  The highest highs and the lowest low.  This was definitely Phil's highest high.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

From Don:

Frequently Jack is challenged on his contention that power in the golf swing comes from the arms, and that the lower body's role is one of a stabilizer.  I thought you'd be interested in another Jack's thinking on this.  From April issue of Golf Digest:

"Big legs are the source of power.  I've been asked how the legs contribute to power, because they aren't touching the club.  The answer is, sturdy legs give you stability, which in turn allows you to swing your arms faster."

Jack Nicklaus

---

From Michael:

I thought that trying to learn a swing from a video even if there are drills to do, did not work.  It doesn't matter if it is your video, or someone elses video.

That is correct for all traditional teaching aids and videos.  Every traditional training aid I have seen has no chance to work and therefore no video or personal instruction will be of use.

It is not correct for Lever-Power-Golf.  A combination of instruction and training aids that force you perform a correct motion can be (and is) learned by golfers becoming their own teacher.  Once a golfer becomes a member of my web site, he/she receive scientific information that allows them to understand the golf stroke; both the non-optimum traditional and the optimum Lever-Power-Golf.  Once you have correct knowledge and training aids that force you swing correctly, learning becomes a matter of performing enough repetitions to build brain patterns that are dominant.

You cannot learn a proper swing unless you have a teacher right there with you to help you along & correct any mistakes you might be making at that moment.

With the traditional swing, even this fails.  The majority of instructors do not have a clue about optimum mechanics.  A hundred years of statistics has proven that they will teach you to shoot around 100.  If you improve, it will be in-spite-of and not because-of instruction.  If you actually do what they teach, you are guaranteed of shooting around 100.

If I or one of my certified instructors teach you Lever-Power-Golf, the learning process is shortened.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

BAD ADVICE FROM SOMEONE WHO HAS FAILED EVERY SYSTEM HE HAS TRIED

I received an Ask Jack from Scigolf on the article below.  Because it is typical of golfers who fail at any system, I am responding to each of his statements and claims.  In good faith, he actually believes that he tried each system or tip and it simply did not work for him.  The author eventually went back to his original mechanics and found that he performed better.  Everyone believes that they can read an instruction and perform it.

O  Everyone believes that they can see a video or a TV swing and reproduce it.
O  Everyone believes that they can learn something new in minutes, hours or days.
O  Neuroscience proves that this approach guarantees failure.

All the golf instruction magazines (Golf Digest, Golf Magazine, Golf Tips, Golf Illustrated, etc.) and the Golf Channel teachers teach TIP golf.  They know you will not get better.  But, it is what keeps you coming back.   You know you are just one TIP away from success.  After all, you succeed 30 to 50 percent of the time now.   You hit a few excellent shots around.  All you need is that one little TIP that will allow you play like the pros (which by the way only succeed 70% of the time).

Neuroscience shows that you are on a constant merry-go-round to failure!

The article below shows this same failure mentality.  The harm this type of article creates is that it may convince some golfers that it has some basis for being correct.   It sounds very logical.  I tried the other systems and they all failed me.  It was only after failure with the other systems that he realized that the system that has failed 97 percent of amateur golfers is, again, the one for him.

The facts are that he has never really tried any of the other systems.  He tried his interpretation of them.  I do not need to see his swing, to know that this is the case.  Neuroscience shows that it is impossible to make a change by reading or seeing a golf swing.

Alternative Swing Methods

by Mark Harman - Pensacola, FL

[Mark Harman requested his article be deleted.]

---

From Joe:

The heads of the golf clubs you originally designed looked almost round when you viewed them face-on, and you gave reasons why this design was the best.  Your new clubs look more like everyone else's golf clubs when viewed from the same angle.  Why the change?  Do you still have any of the old ones for sale?

My original clubs were an excellent design.   However, they had two design features which I now know are not optimum.   Those features are the rounded bottom with bounce, and a center of gravity that is too high.   The current MaxImpact clubs are the easiest clubs ever for solid, consistent contact from any lie.

Jack

---

This question came in as an Ask Scott. I asked Jack to answer it while Scott recuperates.

From Keenan:

I am a beginning right handed golfer with questions, so if you could be so kind to respond.

First, can you explain the differences between the 2 axis swing and single axis swing?  I think the difference is as balance is maintained; weight is shifted from the right side to the left side in the 2 axis swing and weight is maintained on the left side during the single axis swing; i.e. the pitching swing (no weight shift) as opposed to the full swing (weight shift)?

Second, I reason that the golf swing is based on four variables:

1. path
2. pace/ rhythm/ tempo
3. balance
4. the ability to quiet your mind from fear/ doubt and your muscles from tension

Third, If the variables are correct: then wouldn’t consistent pace/ rhythm / tempo be best regulated using a different metronome setting for the putt, chip, pitch and full swing calibrated to the individual golfer natural walking pace?  If so then that would make one constant (how hard to swing) in the golf equation?

My answer will be for him to become a member of the web site.  Scott would not answer it this way.

Here is how I would answer.

You are a beginning golfer with a lot of perceptions about what takes place in a golf stroke.  Answering just your questions would be biggest disservice I any instructor could do for you.  You need to understand the golf stroke and there is only one place to get correct scientific information.  It will take you months to go over and understand even the information.  It will take you 6 months to make an effective change.  It will take 2 full years of you performing the motions correctly to have the patterns go to long term memory and be effective for the rest of your life.

Asking a few question and getting answers will get you on the Quick-Fix Tips Merry-Go-Round - this guarantees you a score of around 97.

Jack

---

From Tim:

Recently you said that you found 400 cc driver heads superior to smaller heads.  Previously I thought you said that the larger head lost out because of increased air resistance.

As far as distance, it does.  Accuracy is far better with the bigger head due to the center of gravity being moved back in the head.  This causes a higher ball flight and less backspin and sidespin.  Accuracy wins over the few yards lost in distance.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

---

My Experience at the 2004 Australian Golf Expo
Jono

Let me give a quick account of my experience at the 2004 Golf Expo at the Melbourne Exhibition Center.

I live in Sydney (about 850km northeast of Melbourne) so I had to fly down and find accommodation in Melbourne, but it was well worth the trouble. I arrived on Tuesday and drove down to the Mornington Peninsula (approx 90 minute drive from Melbourne). I stayed there until Friday and played some of the links courses down there. I played The Dunes course and Moonah Links “Open” course (where the Australian Open was held last year). I would highly recommend any golfers traveling to Melbourne to stop by the Mornington Peninsula and enjoy the fantastic links golf that it offers.

I arrived in Melbourne late Friday afternoon and dropped by the Exhibition Centre. Cameron gave me a VIP pass which enabled me to attend the Expo for free. I met Jack for the first time and I also had the pleasure of meeting Dr Rene Ferdinand who has done a lot of work in the biomechanics of cricket and is now turning his attention to golf. Jack gave me a couple of lessons over the weekend, in between his demonstrations and seminars. Unlike what I had imagined, I found his approach to be very practical and “feel” oriented. I also received some useful advice from Rene.

To say that Lever Power Golf was the main focus of the Melbourne Expo, IMO, is an understatement. Along with the sell out seminars given by Jack on Saturday and Sunday, the interest generated at the LPG stand and at the free hourly demonstrations was more than anyone could have predicted. The highlight of the Expo for me was when Cameron gave a demonstration of his Lever Power swing in a hitting cage. The cage was approximately 15 yards long, yet Cameron’s drive managed to go through the net, narrowly missing a spectator walking behind the cage, with the ball finally coming to rest deep in the wall of the Exhibition Center. I breathed a sigh of relief that my services as a doctor were not required.

I hope Lever Power Golf continues to grow in Australia, allowing the Aussie golfers to enjoy this great game even more.

Cheers,
Jono

---

Golf Expo – Melbourne, Australia (as told by Jake Kuykendall)

The 2004 Golf Expo in Melbourne, Australia was quite an experience for Jack, Cameron Strachan (Australian Dealer) and myself. For four days the local news, radio stations, and general public paid quite a bit of attention to Kuykendall Golf and Jack’s amazing discovery of Lever Power Golf. The first day of the expo, Jack spoke non-stop from the time he got there until the time he left. He kicked off the expo by hitting balls off of a stool into the Yarra River for the local television station. From there he did a couple of radio interviews, and then met with the public. We had a booth set up with our information, as well as a net set up for Jack, Cameron, or myself to hit balls into and demonstrate the swing. Once we finished talking to someone, a whole new group of people would come up and ask us what we were doing. So we quickly figured out that we needed to put a sign up saying that Jack would be doing his presentation each hour on the hour for the duration of the expo weekend. For the next three days, people were showing up at the nets 5-10 minutes early so that they could get a good look at the “63 year old guy hitting his driver 290 yards on a stool”. Kuykendall Golf dominated the entire Golf Expo and generated quite a buzz among the PGA professionals in Australia. One professional in particular came up to Cameron late Saturday night and told him that our system was ridiculous and had no merit. Within 20 minutes of Cameron explaining the science behind the swing, the professional had apologized to Cameron and signed up for a lesson the following Monday.

On the Monday following the show, the three of us gave lessons to three people (including the PGA professional), and Cameron received more phone calls than he could handle. The Herald Sun, Melbourne’s #1 newspaper, wrote an article praising Jack’s genius in the field of golf mechanics. Overall the trip was a great way to get Kuykendall Golf’s name out to the public all throughout Australia.

Jack is currently in New Zealand at Auckland University where Dr. Rene Ferdinand, one of the top Biomechanists in the world, is conducting a study to determine and prove that Jack’s swing theory and mechanics are the most ideal way to swing a golf club ever invented. Dr. Ferdinand is world renowned for his studies in Cricket biomechanics and is eager to let the world know of Lever Power Golf’s advantages as well. Once the tests are conducted and the results are released, there will be further validation that the science behind our swing is correct and the mechanics are the most optimum for an individual to reach his golfing potential.

Since I’ve been back in the US, I’ve had well over 100 people sign up to the website from Australia in just three days! There have been more orders and calls than our company can even handle at this time. So to say that the trip was a success would be an understatement.

---

 In September 2003, Lynda and I played golf in the UK.  One round was at the Royal Lytham Golf Club (where Tiger won a British Open).  After a demonstration and playing a few holes, Mr. Birchenough ordered clubs and joined the web site.  The following article appeared in Golf Links (Dec/Jan, Volume 3, Issue 5, 2003/4).

 The information in the article is below. 

THE INSIDE TRACK

Anyone interested in this approach to golf can get in touch via internet at www.kuykendallgolf.com. Here you can join his Internet Magazine and learn more about Lever Power Golf.

I read with interest your posting on "Head Size and Loft versus Distance and Accuracy."  You mentioned that a 400 cc+ , 10-12 degree driver would increase accuracy substantially by reducuing the gear effect ( if launch angle and COR are optimized).  I thought I understood gear effect to reduce the side spin effects of balls hit either on the toe or heal as long as the path of the clubface was square.  Why is a reduction in gear effect desirable?

As a clubheads loft changes there is more side spins applied.  A 5 degree driver will have more side spins than a 10 degree.  The excessive sides spins cannot be corrected for by gear effect.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

My question is, why do you say to start the downswing with your back to the target?  It's a strange feeling.  What is the reason?

Keeping your back to the target, and keeping the right shoulder up and back, forces the arms to rotate at the correct time in the downstorke.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

Michael, I can help you in three ways.

1. I can optimize your stroke mechanics for maximum distance.  The mechanics you are using now do not allow maximum clubhead speed.   You are duplicating the current long drivers.  Most of them do not have a clue where clubhead speed comes from.

2. I can provide you with scientifically assembled equipment which allows for greater clubhead speed.

3. We can work together on a program to increase your TYPE IIx fast twitch muscles in your arms and shoulders.

If you have an interest, please call (480-706-6228) or send me an e-mail.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

I saw an ad for a 60* lob wedge that had a heavier shaft weighting design.  The shaft weighed 260 grams compared to a steel shaft that weighs 110 grams.  If this concept works for a lob wedge, why wouldn't a heavier shaft work for all other clubs?

There is NO advantage to adding this much weight to a shaft.  It is just getting use to a different feel.  However, the addtional shaft weight can work for a wedge because you do not need over 60 mph of clubhead speed.  Heavy clubs are useless for distance.

Jack

Now I am using your discovery.  Congratulations on your discovery!

Jack is in Australia and will be back next week.  As this email indicates interest in Lever Power golf is expanding.   Recently Jack was in Scotland and played all the courses where the British Open is played.   At each course he conducted a clinic for the pros, demonstrating Lever Power golf.   At least one professional staff is considering changing from teaching conventional golf to Lever Power.

When Jack returns he'll do a column on his Australian trip and we'll post a photo or two.

Don

I saw on one of your previous Q&A's that you can add some weight and extend the shafts of the clubs I already have.  I saw 25 & 30 dollars per club.  Do you still do this and how much does it cost?

We have discontinued trying to optimize other brands of clubs.  It is too time consuming and clubheads with a 7 gram head spread cannot be optimized for a full set.

We do still recommend that you put 2" (old metal shaft) butt extenders in your club and install MaxImpact grips.

Jack

What are your thoughts on this?

This the worst thing you could ever do with a grip.  It causes over-gripping with the left hand and flaring out of the right hand.  The grip will fly out of your hand when wet or in high humidity.

Jack

I have always been a hard swinger.  When I switched to LPG I gained aprox. one club length (150-155 yd. 9 iron).  This is with a hard swing.  When I try to moderate the swing speed my distance gets inconsistent.   My problem is that I have to hit it very pure since I am not leaving much in reserve.  How hard do you feel you swing and do you have any advice on how to moderate the swing and still maintain consistency?

I swing around 85%.   This gives the greatest consistency.  I will post something to the site concerning this in the near future.  This how the brain functions.  That is, if you swing faster than your neurons can fire and keep up, your timing will be off.

Here are suggested drills:

1.   Hit balls at 25%, 50&, 75%, and 85%. Then as hard as you can swing.  Hit them all solidly and with a good trajectory.   When you can do this with consistency, you can swing at any speed you desire.

2.   Hit balls with no backstroke.  Take the club to the top.  Pause for 3 to 5 seconds.  This means you are starting the swing from the correct backstroke position at the top.  Make a smooth easy start of the down stroke - the POWER MOVE.  At waist high in the downstroke, accelerate the club through impact.

Jack

I was wondering how shaft stiffness affects accuracy, if at all?  For instance, if you had a swing speed of 115 mph with a regular shaft compared to the same swing with a stiff shaft would there be any loss in accuracy?

The stiffness of a shaft has very little to do with accuracy.  Stiffness has more to do with ball flight height.

At 115 mph,there would very little loss in accuracy.  A regular shaft flex would be fine.  If you get above 120 mph, the shaft would be too flexible.

Also, are there any good sites or tips on learning to read greens?

Probably not.  There are only 3 things needed -

1. Grain -  Grass grows at an angle.  If the grass looks dark, the blades are pointing toward you, and the light is not reflecting off the blades into your eyes.  If the grass looks shinny, the blades are pointing away from you and the light reflects off the blades and into your eyes.
2. Uphill, downhill, side hill -  Both look and walk along the line of the putt.  You will be able to determine the slope of the green.
3. Speed -  Most practice putting greens are cut to the speed of the greens on the course.  Practice before you start the round for the speed of the greens you are playing that day.

Jack

One thing in particular that caught my eye was that without really focusing on it, my swing speed with all my irons, and especially my driver, has gone up so much I now have to change all my shafts.  This is no joke or just intended just to support your claims, but as simple factual observations.   Today I went to a local shop to check my swing speed.  It was 104-107.  One might say that is no big deal, right?  Well it is, when about 1 1/5 years ago I swung at 89MPH.   Most of it has to do with the LPG programs on your site and the exercises you recommend.  I did most all of them religiously, and there you have it.  I am sure there might be a margin of error with the swing speed devices so I went to 3 other shops.  All the swing speeds were almost identical, within 2MPH average.  Facts are facts, can't argue with them.

Thanks for the e-mail. Correctly applied science works. In fact, it does not allow for failure.

Jack

I need your help.  I use a 4 wood, 5 wood, 7 wood and a 9 wood.  Using your ball placement tape where would I place the ball for the these woods?

Play all fairway wood in the middle of your stance.

Jack

I have a nearly new NG ST110 9 iron, can I trade it in toward one of your MaxImpact 9 irons just to make sure before I order the whole set?

Both Scigolf and I allow a 25% trade in on Natural Golf clubs.  They are so poorly assembled that I break them in half and throw them away.

Jack

I recently saw a TV promo for a golf training aid called the "Inside Approach." They have a website at www.insideapproach.com.  Of the hundreds of golf aids I've seen advertised on TV this seems to be one that would be effective in helping all of us slicers.  This aid is highly endorsed by Jack Nicklaus and Mark Lye, although what golf aid doesn't have a famous golf pro endorsing their product.  It's concept is very similar to the sponges aid you sell on your web site. Would you check out the site and give us your impressions on this golf aid.

I see no reason for it to work.  I could easily hit a ball with a slice swing.  It also promotes coming inside immediately after impact.  This will cause most golfers to break down the left wrist and snap hook or toe the ball to the right.  There have been many devices like this in the past.  A simple 2 x 4 board placed three inches outside the target line accomplishes the same thing - a snap hook, left wrist break down stroke.

Jack

Any thoughts?

I have not read any material that would lead me to believe that this is an effective way to build Type IIx fast twitch forearm muscles.  You need increased resistance at high speed.

If you continue with your program and you start hitting the ball farther, let us know.

Jack

Jack, I just received your new Short Game video.  The production is excellent and the content even better.  I watched your video once, and then went to my local course to try it out.  I couldn't believe how much my short game improved.

The short game is what separates every level of player, from the high handicapper to the average handicapper, the average from single digit, from single digit to scratch, from professionals to scratch amateur, and from Tiger Woods to Phil Michelson.

From the edge of the green in your Short Game video what club are you using?  I ask because I have been using a wedge from the edge of the green and get a much higher ball flight, making judging distance more difficult.

I am using a 9 iron. W to 7 is fine.

Do you go to the 50 degree wedge for shots say longer than 10 yards to 50 yards or what?

I use the 60 degree L wedge for all those shots.

Jack

Jack, Thank you!

I appreciate your kind comments.  Correctly interpreted science works. The clubs are the best ever made.

Jack

In other words, wouldn't this mean that I would need at least 2 to 2 1/2 inches added to make them work for the single axis swing method?

NO!  A person who is 5'9" with short arms may have longer clubs than you, if you have long arms.  Club fitting for single-axis is based on height and arm length.  The additional length of the club has nothing to do with single-axis.  The additional length is because you must move your left hand up on the shaft and not the right hand down.  You need the same lever length in the right hand as you would with a traditional swing in order to generate more clubhead speed with separated hands.  You are no longer pushing on the hinge.  You are now pushing on the doorknob with the same length lever from the right hand to the clubhead.  This is why you get increased clubhead speed.

Jack

In the Sept 2003 issue of GOLF Magazine there is a series of pictures of Carl Wolter hitting his driver.  He is a long drive champ.  He appears to be using an early form of Jack's single axis swing -- the one that J. Heard calls the super swing.

Jerry Heard plagiarized my first version of single axis.  I abandoned it because it causes a severe duck hook if you don't perfectly time the hips being open at least 30 degrees at impact.

His forearms don't rotate until way after hitting the ball...

What photographs are you writing about?  Two photos before impact, his right palm is pointing at the sky.  Two photos after impact, his right palm is pointing at the ground.  This is massive forearm rotation.  You cannot rotate the forearms any more than this.

and his left elbow is straight at shoulder height in the backstroke.  It bends at the top, then goes straight again!  How does he hit so far this way?

The more you bend your left arm, the greater the clubhead speed.  His lower body rotation has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with generating clubhead speed.  Observe the button on his shirt from two photos before impact to impact.  It only moves a few inches.  It does not matter how much you rotate the lower body, if the upper body is not rotating with it.

His high clubhead speed comes from the POWER move, right arm lever extension, and forearm rotation.  This is how all big hitters produce power.  There are no exceptions.

The body is a stabilizer.  Motion, especially rotary, just makes the power production more difficult.

Jack

PGA professional David Duval, who around 1999 was ranked #1 in the world (yes, even ahead of Tiger), has dropped off the radar in terms of his golf game.  For years David's average score on the tour was at or near the top at a shade under 70 (2001 PGA scoring average = 69.73).  Recently his average has been around 74.  David even hired famous golf teaching guru David Leadbetter to help him out but his results have only gotten worse.  I even heard Mr. Duval might be contemplating retirement from the tour.  I believe it has to be mostly mental (aka. confidence) and sort of reminds me of former PGA tour player Ian Baker-Finch.  Finch won the 1991 British Open (score 71-71-64-66) but totally lost his game years later and withdrew from the 1997 British Open after he shot an opening round 92 and quit the tour due to lack of confidence.  I remember reading where Finch was getting help with his game from all the best pro's and teachers but nobody could solve his problems.

All of the best players in the world develop their swings with their own personal sensation.  None of them have a clue as to what they are actually doing.  On my web site, I show that Jack Nicklaus did 100% opposite of what he thought he did in a golf swing and that Ben Hogan did not make the first move down that he thought.

Duval and Finch went to SLOGAN MONGER teachers that are even more CLUELESS than the players.  Leadpoison will destroy a good swing, much less a swing like Duval's.  I have documented Duval's mechanical problems on my web site.

What are your thoughts on David Duval's and Ian Baker-Finch's rapid fall from their once top of the world golf games?

They have changed their neuronal patterns with information from the M-Group (Scientific Moron) teachers.  Their brains do not know what to do anymore.

Also, do you think David Duval would benefit from your Lever Power Golf system if (and that's a big IF) he was willing to give it a fair shake and practice it for a year or so with your personal help (not Mr. Leadbetter's)?

David would benefit with his old swing and would reach heights he never considered if he changed to LPG.

Is Duval's game too fine tuned to make the change physically and/or mentally?

NO! Science does not permit failure.  Once David or Finch or any player understands how simple golf mechanics really are, they can reach their potential.  David's game could return to the best in the world in less than a year.

However, it is close to 100% certainty that I will never hear from David Duval or Ian Baker Finch.

Jack

You teach that the forearms are the main source of power in the golf swing.

The rolling of the forearms through impact and the extension of the right hand by the right forearm are two of the top sources.

Taken to logical conclusion, does that mean that at my current playing ability, if I do increase the size (and power) of my pipes, I will hit farther?

If you increase the amount of Type IIx fast twitch muscles, you will hit the ball farther.  Strength alone will not help.  There are a lot of very strong people playing golf that cannot hit the ball very far.  It is speed of a strong muscle, not just the strength of the muscle that matters.

I am doing heavy wrist work at the time of writing, by attaching iron plates to a bar by way of a rope and rolling the plate up and down.  Do you recommend this?

This is OK for strength.  It does nothing for Type IIx fast twitch.  You need resistance at high speed to develop them -- see the web site for the Swing Fan and weighted club exercises.

Jack

Here are my suggestions on how Jack should have answered the Golf Magazine survey -

   As you know, there is no one universal way to swing a golf club.

I know that is what we tell our students, otherwise we would be out of business and have to get real jobs.  Additionally, we are all scientific morons and thus unable to discover the true Ideal Mechanical Advantage.

   Our job, with your help, is to help our readers determine which side will most benefit their games.

I thought your job was to sell magazines.  Anyway, this is a basic left side vs. right side question.  I tell my students that all they need to do is flip a coin before every round they play; heads=left side, tails=right side.  Why make it more difficult than it has to be?

   One ball position or vary the ball position.

While Jack was not wrong with how he answered he should have given the answer that is in the PGA manual: This is an invalid question because most players can not even address the ball the same way every time so what good is having them focus on ball position going to do?  K.I.S.S.

   Strong grip or Neutral grip.

Since we do not want to teach the Ideal Mechanical Advantage Grip it does not really matter as long as you change their current grip to give the illusion that you really are a top flight instructor.

   One-piece takeaway or early wrist set takeaway.

Jack, you really missed a golden opportunity on this one.  The correct answer is: Whichever the student is most comfortable with as long as they take it low and slow while holding a towel under their rear arm and squeezing a ball between their knees.

   Let head move laterally or swing around a steady head.

I tell my students to picture a stake driven through their head, down the spine, and buried into the ground.  This allows them to have the mental picture that the only way the head should move in a golf swing is up and down.  I thought everyone knew that!

   1st move down: let arms fall or transfer weight toward target.

Both of these answers are wrong.  You have to do 2 things at the same time; Let gravity pull your arms down and push off your right foot towards the target.

   Left heel off the ground or left heel stays on the ground.

In terms of the average golfer that is too much to think about while they are swinging so a more important questions would be to ask should the left foot be angled towards the target at address or should it be perpendicular towards the target?  If we are going to confuse them start with the address position.

Chip with the same club or chip with a variety of clubs.

Again, both are non optimal.  I have all of my students purchase and chip with a special chipper I developed. The Kuyryourball Greenside Assassin!

Chip like you putt or chip with some wrist hinge.

Use my special chipper, The Kuyryourball Greenside Assassin, and it will not matter.  Haven't you seen my infomercial?

Bunker play- regulate distance with clubface or regulate by length of swing

Your joking right?  it does not matter because most amateurs suck!  I just tell them to hit it really hard to make sure they get out of the sand.  If they land within 40 yards of the green they can then use my special chipper, The Kuyryourball Greenside Assassin!

   Pitching control distance by swing pace or by swing length.

Did they move the plate?  Isn't it still 60 something feet away?  Why not go against the grain and have them control distance by club loft.

   Putting- eyes over the ball or eyes inside target line.

I have my students line up with one eye over the ball and one eye behind the ball.

   Inside-square-inside or straight back, straight through.

It does not really matter as long as they swing it like a pendulum and take enough time to slow up the group behind them.

   Right hand low or left hand low.

What about side straddle?  It all depends on the students anatomy and how much $ you think you can milk from them.

   Shotmaking-adjust clubface or adjust swing shape.

Again, most amateurs are so bad they really need to do both.

   Between clubs- take one more club or take one less club and swing hard.

Neither of these options are optimal.  Just kick or toss your ball forward until you are not between clubs anymore.

   Best ever- Jack or Tiger.

Bobby Jones

   Are there any other Great Debate that we have forgotten to include above?

Yes - Fat Jack vs. Skinny Jack and plaid pants vs knickers.

   When you really need 10 more....

10 more what? inches? dollars?  Please be more specific.  If you want 10 more yards just kick you ball forward 20 yards then say, "Oh, I forgot we are not playing a scramble" then move your ball back 10 yards.

When you absolutely must hit the fairway.

Swing as hard as you can.  If and when you find your ball just take an unplayable lie and drop it in the fairway.  If you lose your ball walk where no one can see you and pull one out with the same markings then repeat the steps above.

For making a proper takeaway.

Think low & slow, turn from the waist up, hold that towel.

For making a smooth transition at the top.

Ignore the previous answer, it will only make you tense.

   For avoiding excessive muscle tension.

Stop reading Golf Digest and going for their quick fixes.  Try practicing once in a while.  If that is to difficult then try 3 beers and a Valium.

   For hitting a draw.

Try to hit something on the right.  Your ball is sure to go to the left.

For hitting a low shot.

Ignore the group of trees your standing in and do what you always do: SWING HARD AND LOOK UP

   For executing a greenside bunker shot.

Distract your playing partners and just throw it out.

   For hitting a high lob.

HA HA HA HA! You're kidding right?   The only advice I can give here is at least have all of your playing partners stand behind you out of harms way.

   For holing a must make 10 footer.

If you have not invested in your own Kuyryourball Greenside Assassin do the following: walk around and look at the putt from all 4 sides of the hole, line up your putt, take a deep breath, say a little prayer, then hit your ball.  If you make it pump your fist and exclaim, "That's what I'm talking about."   If you miss tap down the imaginary spike mark and say "well pros only make 40% of those putts."

   Imagine you have qualified for the U.S. Open... Teacher...

After watching Swordfish my first choice would be Halle Barry.  Imagine those arms wrapped around you for a few weeks.  After her it would be Jack, Scott, or Jessie.  If all of those 4 were unavailable I would have to choose between sponge bob square pants, ren and stimpy, leadbetter, and/or harmon.  With any of them there would be an acute absence of scientific knowledge!

   Which golf instructor... greatest influence..

Jack was technically correct with his answer.  However, I believe this question was why he was taken off the top 100 list. The correct answer according to Golf Magazine is either Leadbetter, Steve Smith, or Jim Flick because they have given us a blueprint on how to make money, open schools, and sell videos.  These objectives are after all our most important otherwise we would be out of work and have to get REAL JOBS!

Jack, thanks for taking the time to discover the truth and share the knowledge.

Sean

I received this questionaire from Golf Magazine when I was listed as one of their top 100 teachers.  You should find their questions and my answering interesting.  You should also be able to see why instructions from Golf Publications offer very little help.  They will not let go of outdated golf dogma instructions. Here are their questions (in bold) and my answers:

THE GREAT DEBATES

As you know, there is no one universal way to swing a golf club.

I do not agree with this statement nor does physics.  Physics demands that their be an IDEAL MECHANICAL ADVANTAGE.

For the scientific answer to all these debate questions, please visit my new web site www.kuykendall.com

Below, we've listed some of the most controversial choices in golf instruction.

They're only controversial due to lack of understanding the sciences of Physics, Anatomy, Kinesiology, Neuroscience, Fitness and Nutrition.  There is no controversy when these sciences are understood.

Our job, with your help, is to help our readers determine which side (of these arguments) will most benefit their games.  Please circle the statement under each choice that best represents your feelings on the topic.

Virtually all of the choices are for non-optimum performance.  It is nonsense to choose between two non-optimum methods.

Full Swing:

One ball position for all clubs     OR   Vary the ball position

Neither of the two options is optimum.  For a normal full swing shot, irons should be played off the right breast, fairway woods off the center of the body and teed shots off the front breast.

Strong grip    OR     Neutral grip

Neither of the two options is optimum.  The strong grip player is always fighting a duck hook and must perfectly time a hip and shoulder rotation.  The neutral grip player is always using manipulative mechanics to try to get power and square the clubface at impact.

There is an IDEAL-MECHANICAL-ADVANTAGE GRIP. The back of the left hand and clubface are exactly the same. The grip of the club lies directly across the palm of the right hand (exactly like you would hold a hammer – Moe Norman).

One-piece takeaway    OR     Early wrist set takeaway

Neither of the two options is optimum.  The backstroke has virtually no effect on an effective golf stroke.  Four of the five great ball strikers of all times took the club inside and up.  The fixation on the backstroke and especially reaching and claiming to make a large arc (it is actually the smallest arc that can be made) is one of the major reason most amateurs are off balanced and cannot perform a correct downstroke move.

Let head move laterally    OR     Swing around a steady head

These two options are simply misleading.  The head moves to some extent in all swings.  Focusing on head movement is a nonsense instruction because any incorrect movement is the fault of an incorrect body movement not anything to do with the head.

1st move down: Let arms fall     OR     Transfer weight toward target

Both of these are the major reason amateurs never play good golf and Tiger Woods cannot cure his perceived hands caught behind his back problem.  The scientifically correct start of the downstroke is two virtually simultaneous motions.  Sit down with virtually no rotation of the hips and legs while the hands move backward and downward.  Sam Snead and Moe Norman made this move perfectly.  Ben Hogan and Sergio Garcia illustrate the best hand motion.

Left heel off the ground     OR     Left heel stays on the ground

The left heel off the ground is never optimum.  The left heel stays on the ground is partially correct.  There is no scientific reason for either heel to ever come of the ground.

Short Game:

Chip with the same club     OR     Chip with a variety of clubs

Neither of these options provides the whole scientific picture.  From the standpoint of physics, chipping with a variety of clubs will always win (using a machine to do the chipping).  However, the fear mode is the final determiner of the outcome of any shot – especially in the short game.  Confidence with a club will always outweigh choosing the correct club scientifically.  Phil Michelson almost always chips with a 60 degree wedge.  This is never scientifically optimum.

Chip like you putt     OR     Chip with some wrist hinge

Both of these options are stated with partial information and therefore, no scientific answer can be given.  Many great putters used wrist putting (Billy Casper).  When you say chip with some wrist hinge, you are making the incorrect assumption that the wrists are one unit and that both must hinge.  Scientifically optimum chipping does not hinge the left wrist but does hinge the right wrist.

Bunker Play:

Regulate distance with clubface     OR     Regulate by length of swing

Both of these are correct.  You have to decide between both of the options on every bunker shot.  There can never be a choice of just one of them.

Pitching:

Control distance by swing pace     OR     By swing length

Both of these are correct.  You have to decide between these options on all pitch shots.  There can never be a choice of just one of them.

Putting:

Eyes over ball     OR     Eyes inside target line

There is no scientific evidence that one method is superior to the other in putting.  It is easily observable that the eyes do not have to be over a ball to hit it with accuracy – baseball, tennis and full shhots in golf.

Inside-square-inside stroke     OR     Straight back, straight through

Using a machine it can easily be demonstrated that straight back and straight through will lead to the most accuracy.  There can only be one point where an inside-square- inside stroke will have the putter face pointing in the correct direction.

Right-hand low grip     OR     Left-hand low grip

Neuroscience easily demonstrates that optimum mechanics will be with the dominant hand or right-hand low controlling the stroke.  Neuroscience also shows that the fear factor determines the final outcome.  If you have less fear with a left-hand low, then it will work better.

Shotmaking:

Adjust clubface for fade/draw     OR     Adjust swing shape for fade/draw

Both of these are correct.  I have never seen one used exclusively over the other.  I see a combination of both.

Between clubs:

Take one more club     OR     Take one less club and swing hard

Both are correct and neither is superior.  Each shot must be decided based on the conditions.

Best Ever:

Jack Nicklaus     OR    Tiger Woods

Mine would be just another opinion and would never change anyone's mind.  This will be discussed for many years.  Good subjects for magazines.

Are there any other Great Debate that we have forgotten to include above?

About 50.  See partial list of theories over the last 100 years in my web site.

GREATEST IMAGES OF ALL TIME

Golf is filled with great imagery: Turning inside a barrel; aligning your body and clubface along parallel railroad tracks; holding the club as if it were a small bird, to name a few classics.  Which images (visual aids) have yielded the best results with your students? Please tell us your most effective for the following:

When you really need 10 more .......

Swing with more ARM speed.

When you absolutely must hit the fairway...

Swing with controlled arm speed.

For making a proper takeaway...

Pull right elbow straight back and extend right wrist to the maximum.

For making a smooth transition at the top of the swing...

Move the right hand away from the right shoulder using the right triceps.

For avoiding excessive muscle tension...

Focus on right arm making the only necessary motion.

For hitting a draw...

Adjust stance and clubface and swing more inside to outside.

For hitting a low shot ...

Play ball back in stance and have a low follow through.

For executing a greenside bunker shot...

Decide what shot is required and execute it.

For hitting a high lob shot...

Perform the shots that were successful in practice.

For holing a must make 10-foot putt...

Focus on task.

Imagine you've qualified for the U.S. Open and you have just a few weeks to prepare.  Which teacher would you see for help (not including yourself) and why?

Actually two, Scott Hazledine and Jesse Mercado.  They are both trained in science and optimum mechanics.  Either one of them could spot a mechanical flaw.

Which golf instructor (past or present) do you believe has had the greatest influence on the way the game is taught and why?

Unfortunately, I cannot list any instructors for having a positive influence on the game.  Golf handicaps have not changed for the last 100 years.  No teaching method or tip or individual has made any change.

Current instructors are almost exclusively big-muscles and torquing the upper body to the lower body advocates.  Science shows this to be laughably stupid and it ABSOLUTELY does not work!  No tour golfer actually does this no matter what they 'feel'.

His answer was NO. He stated bluntly that readers wanted quick fix tips only.

Jack

"How about a dozen golf balls -- send me your comments and if I use them I'll send you a dozen Slazenger Tour-Calibre balls. You don't have to agree with Jack. I'm really after some good humor!"

Lowering yourself to bribery Don?  :)

You know us golfers all too well!

I had seen Jack's responses before and the "our readers want quick fixes" pretty much sums up most of the golf mags and teaching.  There is no quick fix, just lots of "correct" practice and knowing what really causes errors.

I am still amazed that when I am at the range and hit a slice (still do some of those) friends will say "how can you not slice with a grip that big?"  (Jack's Impact grip).  They seem to ignore the fact that I hit 8 out of 10 straight with good distance.  If I had time to practice every day I think I could get much better at this silly game but for now it is fun watching my shots improve a bit at a time.

Jack tends to be a bit blunt, to put it politely, but that is refreshing to those of us who don't mind learning new things.

I don't know if that qualifies me for the golf balls or not but keep up the good work.

Here are my comments on the Golf Magazine article and Jack.

1)  On most of his comments they probably had no idea what he was talking about.  I can see them looking at each other and shaking their heads.  "Poor Jack" they sigh.

2)  Jack is not striving to achieve any awards for diplomacy.  If he is please don't send him as special envoy to the Middle East.  There would be no golf courses but plenty of bunkers when he got through.

3)  The problem with science trying to be definitive is that by it's very nature today's discovery is tomorrow's debacle.  Jack was just as adamant about his theories (facts, excuse please) before he discovered LPG.  Imagine the Jack of 1975 arguing with the Jack of 1985 and both of them taking to task the Jack of 1995.  One of them would have gotten hurt.  Jack has proved that science is evolution, and he himself may not yet have made his greatest contribution to golf.

4)  I use LPG because it places no stress on my shoulders and is easy to do compared with anything else I've tried and I am a single digit player.  Thanks Jack!  Thanks for your courage and determination.  Be encouraged when the golfing elite pass you by, it means you are doing something they would rather not deal with; searching for real answers.

Don

I am Jack Kuykendall's representative in Australia and New Zealand.  I've recently returned from Phoenix where I spent 3 weeks working with Jack learning about Lever-Power-Golf and the true science of golf.

My bio is posted on Jack's website if you would like to know more about me or read Jack's appraisal.

For those golfers in Australia and New Zealand, Jack will be in Melbourne, Australia for the first two weeks in December.  He will be available for a limited number of private lessons in that time.  We will also be conducting one or two seminars.  I am still finalising details but will keep you posted.

Jack will be returning to Australia in late January where he has been signed as the International Guest for GolfExpo.  GolfExpo is the biggest golf consumer show Australia has ever held.  The show runs from Thursday the 29th of Jan to Sun the 1st of February.  Jack will be giving a number of presentations and demonstrations during the 4 days.  It will be also the first time his products will be available for retail sale in Australia.  After GolfExpo Jack and I will be doing more seminars in Melbourne and hopefully Sydney.

If any one would like more information about Jack's visit or on LPG, I can be contacted by email at stracks@ocean.com.au or they can visit Jack's Magazine

Here are the comments are in from most who attended the LPG outing.  Before I go over them, here are the winners of the tournament on Sunday.

1st Place:  Norm Licciardi, Scott McGonigal, John Ripp and John Spain 67
2nd Place:  Don Mitzel, Charles Shepard, Allan Simons, Duane Walker 69
3rd Place:  Bill Blair, Rory Bednar, Richard Fordiani, Thomas Wilwert 70

Here are some comments:

It was a great pleasure to meet you in person and to associate with the other LPG ers at the outing.  You, Jessie, Larry, and Cameron are an inspiration to the golf industry.  I have taken one-day schools but never a three-day school and I was very impressed with everything that you accomplished during our stay.  The Sheraton was a fine hotel and the courses were excellent.  The meals were great.  The pick up and delivery to and from the airport was above par.  The attention to every detail and service once there was outstanding.  Please think of me for the next outing no matter where it is held.

Here’s my comments’ regarding the first outing.  First I’d like to answer a few questions that you might have.  Did I get my $$ worth?  Yes.  Did you deliver everything that you promised?  Yes. Things I liked:
1) The accommodations and resort staff were excellent.
2) The golf courses were fine. Practice facility was excellent.
3) The instructors were excellent - very friendly and knowledgeable.  It was good to hear different interpretations, sensations, and mental concepts to describe the same motion.
4) The format was good. Getting out on the course with instructors was a good idea.  Taking a new swing to the course is extremely difficult - encouragement and feedback at this point is helpful.
5) The other students were a pleasure to meet. It was nice to meet fellow LPGers.
6) The new alignment aid is good is quieter and more portable than the vision track.

A few thoughts:
1-   The format is great.  Instruction plus actual play.
2-   The ratio of teacher to pupil is very good with a lot of personal attention.
3-  The facilities were great. Both the hotel and golf.
4-  A more temperate climate would be better for old geezers like me.  I felt sometimes I was going to pass out even though I was drinking tons of water.
5-  On a scale of 1-10 I would give the entire experience a 9 with the heat being the only detractor.

It was an awesome learning experience for me.  I learned so much more than I ever could by watching a video. I am completely sold on your system, and I am certain my golf is going to improve a great deal.  It was more like becoming a member of a great club than attending a commercial golf school.

We were like 12 peas in a pod. I had so much fun...everyone was just great!

Just responding to your request for feedback on the LPG outing.  What an incredible deal at $1,100.  I did not expect the level of instruction we got, but was delighted to receive it.  I had assumed an outing would have been primarily a group of your students getting to know each other, playing several rounds and sharing thoughts.  Needless to say I was overwhelmed and very appreciative of the opportunity to participate in something of this nature.  I am almost racked with guilt for winning a set of irons.

The highlight of the outing was getting several perspectives on the swing from the various instructors. I was greatly impressed with the knowledge and patience of both Jesse and Larry.  Thanks for a very enjoyable and beneficial 3 days.  I got my money's worth and then some.

What a great time I had at the outing!  I not only learned a tremendous amount but also met some of the nicest people! What a great staff you have!  Thanks for putting it all together!

I am glad that you enjoyed the LPG Outing as much as we did putting it on.

Jack

Why is it you continue to teach methods other than LPG, especially the traditional golf swing?

I only offer to teach them.  It is possible to shoot around a 100 with traditional golf.   However, no one has ever taken a traditional lesson from me.  Every one changes to LPG once it is explained to them.

Jack

I've been trying out different golf stances and have found that my control increases when I keep my knees locked with no knee bend from address to follow-through.  This seems to keep me more steady on my swing similar to a camera on a tripod.  I have used this with both my woods and irons.  Would you please let me know what your thoughts are on this technique.

I would love to see a video.  It should limit clubhead speed between 20 and 30%.  How far are you hitting your driver with this technique?

Also, I've been trying out your LPG technique (w/LPG trainer) and my shots are now consistently going straight instead of slicing into the forest.

I don't see how you could generate any effective clubhead speed with the straight left arm method and the knees locked out.  Only with LPG could you generate anything approaching satisfactory clubhead speed.

Jack

I have 3 Natural Golf Be Cu woods(15*,19*,and 23*).  What is your opinion of them?

The heads are OK.  Their assembly and shafts are so poor that they are not good clubs.

I was thinking of trading at least one in for your customized woods.  Between the MaxImpact fairway woods and the Scigolf woods, which would you recommend?

MaxImpact are the latest models.  Scigolf sells MaxImpacts.

I am a 25-30 handicapper and have 85-90 mph swing with driver.  How much improvement can I expect in clubhead speed?   I am 45 and in good shape--I've been told my speed is unlikely to change much...short arms,etc.

You should be able to increase to a minimum of 100 mph.  There is a possibility of reaching 110mph.

Jack

You mentioned that one-handed putting does not work whether facing the target or in a traditional stance.

If I said it didn't work, then I used the wrong words.  All putting styles work.  What I thought I said, was that there is no scientific reason for it to work and that no one has ever been a good putter with a one-handed method on any of the tours.

What about Side-Saddle putting with two-hands and facing the target?

That is a good technique.

This technique is USGA legal as long as your not standing on, astride or directly behind your line of putt while on the putting surface. It describes this method in www.puttmagic.com

I've tried this Side-Saddle putting method (using 48" STX Sync Tour putter) and it has worked great for me, but many of my friends laugh and say they don't see any PGA pro's using it so they won't even give it a try.

That is not the reason they will not try it.  That is just their excuse.  PGA tour player are putting weirder than they have in the history of the game.  None of the weird styles are very successful.  They are just more successful than those players' failure style.

By the way they are the same friends who were at first skeptical of your Lever-Power Golf technique which I'm trying out (bought your LPG kit) because of the same philosophy of no PGA pro's using it.

Again, that is not a reason to try my system.  It is a new system and, therefore, no tour player could use my method.  I will have to develop my own tour players or wait around 30 years for science to catch up with the traditional dogma.

I've had really good success using your LPG technique after only practicing for a short time and my friends have muted their laughter as they've see my shots consistently travel straight and my scores lower than theirs.  A very good player from Australia is here and working with me on the system.  His statement is that LPG is like cheating.  He is hitting balls closer to the hole and longer than he ever has.  His drives are around 330 yards and he has at least one flag stick in the last three rounds.  Thanks again for your excellent web site and I look forward to your comments on Side-Saddle putting whether pro or con. :)

Science can only influence putting to a small degree.  The key is controlling the FEAR MODE.  If you think you can or you think you can't, you're right.  Fear Rules.  No matter what system you settle on, it will be the fear mode that determines how good you will putt.  The best method I have ever tried or seen was by Paul Trevillion.  He has a method called Missing Impossible.  You bend over and the right hand is about 6 inches from the head of the putter.  Since Americans won't bend over, I don't teach it.

Jack

Info on the putter can be viewed at this website: www.scientificgolfers.com

I have built many different putters that a golfer would use in this fashion.  I have not found them to be effective.  One handed putting facing the target or with a traditional stance has not worked in play.

Nothing invented over the last 100 years beats a center-shafted 35" putter used in a standard fashion with the dominant hand low and in control.

All the variation you see today is because of fear.  I have seen no great putters with style variations.

Jack