Ask The Professor Archives Part 12

Comments?

There are two factors involved; mechanical ability and fear.   The width of the fairways was outside of their mechanical ability by around 50%.   You would have to have the accuracy of Moe Norman or Calvin Pete to hit those fairways.   No other tour player has ever acquired the accuracy of either of these players.

The major factor is the fear circuit.   The fear circuit is different from the mechanical circuit (I explain this in detail on the web site).  Fear Rules!   When a golfer's brain knows something is outside of its mechanical ability, the fear circuit alters the mechanical circuit.   With each swing failure, the next swing of the same type will usually be an even bigger failure.   When the pressure reaches the level of the 18th hole at the US Open, you get the snap hook and sculled iron of Mickelson and the missed iron into the green of Montgomery.

Since no one (including every sports psychologist) in traditional golf understands the fear factor, they will never understand how to assist golfers.

Any golfer who brings a guru to a major tournament with him, decreases his chance of winning.   It takes many months to establish an effective brain pattern.   If you are working on changes in your mechanics a week before a tournament, you decrease your chances to play optimally.   Those circuits will never be effective under pressure.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

I am interested in the MaxImpact-II-Twins. Do I need the full set?

You do not need all the MaxImpact-II-Twins.   You need these :60-45-9-7-5-3.

These six clubs replace all your irons and fairway woods.

Jack

I currently have a Maximpact S and W wedge.   I was looking to invest in a more full set.  However, I don't have enough money at the moment to buy a full set.   I was curious if it would be beneficial for me to just start with purchasing the 3, 5, 7, and 9 Maximpact irons to add to my S and W?   I know your current set is similar to this setup, although you are using your new Twins set.

Shawn, I would suggest only the 5,7,9 with the MaxImpact irons.   I would get a Synchron Fairway wood for the shots that require a 3 iron length.

Jack

I want to know what position the trailing arm should be in at the top of the Lever Power Swing.   I read previously that someone was told about the baseball hitters' stance and that the trailing elbow closer to the body is not as powerful a position to be in.   Before I read this I remember you describing the takeaway as inside with maximum trailing wrist extension.   Is the trailing wrist, elbow and shoulder joint plane close to perpendicular to the golf club shaft at the top of the swing?  I think this would have the maximum trailing wrist extension.

I never answer questions about a mechanical move until you have become a member of my web site, purchased the LPG training aids and performed the IRON LAW DRILLS for six months.   To answer your question would be TIP teaching.   All TIP teaching fails miserably. The brain does not work on TIPS.   No one motion can ever make a golf stroke effective.   One incorrect movement will always produce undesirable results.

I swear I will join the Science Mag website one day, maybe this year,

This would be a good place to start.

I have been working on my LPG swing since late 2002 and am convinced it is the easiest way to swing having been double axis and Naturally Despicable Golf single axis before.

I am really confused.   How can you be practicing LPG when you are not a member of my web site and do not have my training aid?

I have yet to hit a ball with a full swing, but have pitched (no lead wrist break works fabulously) and chipped and putted (the club behind ball method works well for me too).

I am now even more confused.   If you have yet to take a full swing, what have you been working on for the last four years?

Thanks for starting the question with The Greatest Scientist in Golf History.   Based on your email, I am definitely the worst salesman.

Jack

Your analysis of the golf swing is pure and absolutely authoritative.   For those of us who spend time trying to understand the physics of the swing, your web site is invaluable.   One question for you: John Daly hits the ball exceptionally long by increasing the distance his clubhead travels from the top of his backswing to impact.   Does increasing the pre-impact distance of the clubhead increase the amount of work being performed (and consequently increase clubhead speed) without requiring additional arm strength?   What's the math?   Thanks!

Big long backstrokes only add to pain in the back and shoulders and mechanical difficulty to recover from.   Look at the two young long drivers on tour (Bubby Watson and J.B. Holmes).   J.B. has no left wrist break at the top and looks like a ¾ traditional backstroke.   Yet, Holmes was airmailing (air carries over 340 yards) Daly in Phoneix.   There is no math needed over what is on my web site.

Kostis was in rare form.   Falsely trying to show that Holmes had hip spin to produce his clubhead speed.

Jack

I noticed you have a new name for your IronWoods.   You said you changed the name because IronWoods are not like hybrids.  Help!   What is the difference?

My latest invention is being called MaxImapct-II-Twins (MI-II-T).  The II stands for second generation MaxImpact clubs.   The twins have several meanings:

• They replace both irons and fairway woods (II).
• The longer clubs are all identical (Twins)
• The Wedges are all identical (Twins)

Hi John!   You have a new set of clubs?
Hi Andy!  Yes, I got them last week.   They're really great!
But you only have woods, where are your irons?
These aren't woods.   They're called MaxImpact-II-Twins.
Twins?
They have a lot of identical qualities and provide for double use.  It's true that the shape of the club head looks like a wood, but the similarities end there.  These clubs are neither woods, nor irons.   They're Twins – MaxImpact second generation Twins.
So what's the difference?
Twin clubs are all identical.   They have the same length and the same weight, and most importantly – tthey feel the same when you swing.   The only difference between the clubs is the loft.
So, in what way would this help me?
This means you can use the same swing for every club.   You use the same swing for your Twin-3 as for your Twin-9.   You couldn't do that with your clubs.   Can you use the same swing for your 3-iron as for your 9-iron?
No, of course not.
So, if you could use the same swing for all the clubs in your bag wouldn't that be good?
Yes, that would be great.   It would make golf so much simpler.
Precisely, golf is so much simpler now when my bag is filled with MaxImpact-ii-Twins clubs.
What does Twins stand for?
Twin stands for Tailored With Identical Nature.  All the Twin clubs are identical.   Only the loft will vary from club to club.
I'm frustrated with my golf clubs.   Can I try your Twins?
Of course, but remember that they were tailored to fit me.

Jack

My questions are related to the loft, among other things:
1.   With a 460cc club, is there any advantage in having, say a 11 or 12 degree loft versus the standard 10.5 degree head?  Will that launch the ball higher?

No.   You can vary launch angle with tee height.

2.   My 4-iron--I like to hit the 4-iron high and I position the ball forward for that.  The thing is when I hit the ball high that way, I also tend to put some right spin on the ball.  If I play the ball a little back, the ball is straight but low.  Is it possible for you to fit a 5-iron head (higher loft) on the shaft meant for the 4-iron?

Yes, because of the weighting system of the MaxImpact iron heads.

3.  The MaxImpact irons are fine.  My only point is all the clubs feel very light during the swing, whereas I prefer to be able to feel that clubhead a little.  Is there anything I can do to the clubs to create more head feel?

Yes.   Mix tungsten powder with epoxy and add it in the cavity on the back of the club.   Use the same amount for each club.  Start with 5 grams and see how you like it.   Keep adding more in 5 gram increments until you get the head feel you like.

Jack

I have been playing golf for over fifty years.   I have also taught the golf swing for the last twenty.  My method of playing and teaching has always been based on the Earnest Jones method.

Mr. Jones was correct in his belief that the body is an admirable follower of the arms.   However, he was incorrect in his teaching methods and in his belief in centrifugal force and that a knife swinging on the end of a string is how clubhead speed produced.

Due to illness and injury I am no longer able to coordinate the movements necessary to perform a "feel" swing.

That is because there are NO feel swings.   The brain does not work on feel.   The brain controls motions by establishing patterns in the basil ganglia and directing muscle to contract.   What has been termed feel is subconscious control of movement after thousands of repetitions.   Most golfers start with a two-axis snap-hook grip and rotary body motion slice mechanics.  This is the basic PGA, Leadbetter, Harmon, etc., teaching method.   The average golfer is doomed to a score of around 100.  Once the timing of this method is lost (in your case due to illness and injury), It is extremely difficult to ever regain.

I was always taught and did teach that the golf swing was an art not a science.   Your method suggests I have been perhaps wrong all these years.

I enjoy helping golfers improve beyond their wildest imagination.   Having to tell someone something they have believed in for most of their life is incorrect is not a pleasure.   However, the golf swing is PURE science.   Art has nothing to do with reaching and playing to your golfing potential.

It is not complex science.   It is physics 101, anatomy 101, kinesiology 101, neuroscience 101, fitness 101 and nutrition 101.   I cover all of these in detail on my web site.

The starting place to making a change is a membership to my web site.   This provides you with scientific knowledge.   Once you understand that the golf stroke is laughably simple, you are ready for the journey to reaching your golfing potential.   An explanation and demonstration of an optimum golf stroke takes less than a minute and has on three moves - Lock, Load, Fire.   The changing of your brain patterns to make those three simple moves takes a minimum of 90 days, using my training aids and practicing my IRON LAW DRILLS three or more times a week to get any type of usable program in short-term memory.   It will take approximately six months of the drills to make the short-term memory pattern stronger than your current patterns and see real results on the golf course (approximately cutting your handicap in half).   It takes two full years for short-term memory patterns to go into the outer cortex and become permanent.   This is when it becomes what golfers call feel.   At this stage, your subconscious cannot make an error if the fear circuits do not interfere with the mechanical circuits.

Can an old dog learn a new trick?

Go to my web site under new posting and read how 80-year old Tom Messinger established usable short-term memory patterns in 90 days.   Not only can you learn, but you will play the best golf of your life.

Jack

I have been using LPG now for over a year.  It is a great system and puts virtually no strain on my body.   My distance is comparable to my conventional swing.  Do you have any idea how many people stay with LPG?   I know many single axis people try other techniques and a goodly number end back with CG.

There are many reasons why golfers do not continue with Singe-Axis golf and Lever-Power-Golf.   One reason it that many of the golfers seeking success start with the copycat systems – Natural Golf, the Todd Graves versiion, Big Grip golf and The Jerry Heard Super Swing.

Natural Golf was and still is a disgrace to Single-Axis golf and to every golfer who bought off on their spin.   In 1995, immediately after they LEGALLY stole the company from me, they changed the teaching system and club design.   According to their advertising, over 100,000 golfers tried what they were teaching.   I can assure you, no golfer improved because of their teaching.   The Natural Golf makeover shown on the Golf Channel should have convinced anyone experimenting with the system to stop.   I don't think there has ever been anything as embarrassing as that debacle.   Natural Golf spent millions in advertising.   Their false claims and incorrect teaching of Single-Axis guaranteed failure.   Because of this, a large number of golfers have failed with Single-Axis.   After I left the company, every golfer who tried the changed Natural Golf system had to fail.   Any success would be in-spite-of and not because-of their instructions.   They went bankrupt in 2005.   I had hoped that they would finally be gone.   Unfortunately, another person with money has purchased them and will be allowing them to continue harming golfers.

Todd Graves, Big Grip golf and The Jerry Heard Supper Swing can all be lumped together.  They are golfers believing in my discoveries and then teaching their non-optimum perception and version.   None of them will ever get positive results because-of what they teach.   Everyone is capable of getting testimonials with outlandish claims.   But, again, it will be in-spite-of and not because-of what they teach.

Every time I get one of their students, I wan t to cry.   I have yet to have one of them with any understanding of Moe's mechanics, or Single-Axis, or anything that would allow a powerful and accurate golf stroke.

When it comes to Lever-Power-Golf, I do not keep up with success and failures.   The system cannot fail if a golfer will follow my instructions.   Science does not allow for failure.   Golfers fail Lever-Power-Golf for one and only one reason - they do not follow my instructions.

Another reason is that the golf industry is full of experts.  Experts are the guardians of the status-quo. "If Jack Kuykendall's Single-Axis and Lever-Power-Golf were really superior, we would certainly know about it because we are experts.   However, because we did not invent Kuykendall's discoveries, they must be false."   Experts will now make their one liners, "If it were so good, the tour players would be using it."  They will continue with all the other experts and the magazines that publish their perception.   At no time will they ever let facts get in the way of their false perceptions.

All new discoveries take common sense, study and a faith that science is superior to perceptions and experts.   Golf is not a game or a sport.   For those who play it, it is a religion.   Every individual golfer will live and die by his Expert.   Changing someone's Expert is a difficult to impossible task.

I think if the average golfer would realize it takes time to master LPG and realize it will become the best way to play the game it would be more popular.

Unfortunately, you are using common sense.   Golfers must fail with traditional golf, Natural Golf, Jerry Heard Super Swing, Graves golf and Big Grip golf before they come to me.   They have to fail at every system they try, before they will try science.

I was removed from Golf Magazine's Top 100 Teachers because Lever-Power-Golf works.   An editor at Golf Magazine confessed that they would never print an article about Lever-Power-Golf.   He stated, "We found out when we started the magazine that golfers will pay for tips.   If we write an article about Lever-power-Golf, we will lose subscribers.   There will be no reason to purchase the magazine."  This made excellent sense to me.   I would not write about something that worked if I were selling tips either.

It does not matter how many times a golfer fails; he knows that they are just one tip away from the SECRET.   It is far too big a shock for a golfer's brain to know that there is no secret.

The golf market is very big and the failure to reach true potential is close to 100%.  I just have to wait until the time is right for a golfer to come to me.   I can get you early and you will experience a lifetime of playing golf to your potential.   Or, I can get you later and you can enjoy the remainder of your golfing time playing to your potential.

Jack

Is there anywhere, a totally objective, non-bias, science priority, Bio-mechanics group that tests human motion activies?

Humans are not constructed to be non-bias.   Perceptionists with the most money and advertising will win the race in today's society.

Jack

I was wondering what your thoughts were on the hammY Putter?

Since I invented a better head with the same design a long time before they did, their copy-cat model is usable.

Jack

Don

My first question is regarding optimum club assembly.  Have you ever performed a quantitative test to determine that optimum assembled clubs with your Power Ring are in fact superior performing versus traditionally assembled clubs?

A quantitative studies is not necessary.   To go through the very difficult and time consuming exercise of proving a simple scientific equation for the rotation of a lever with different weight distributions is just unnecessary.  These simple Newtonian equations do not allow for any other results.   The reason that quantitative is not necessary is that no golfer who has hit my MaxImpact irons has or ever will hit a traditional iron farther or straighter.

I suspect that they are, but I think it would be valuable to establish an undeniable quantitative increase in performance.

This is an interesting perception.   However, it does not agree with the facts.   The companies that advertise the most and pay tour professionals the most have always, and will always have the highest percentage share of the market.   No one in the traditional golf establishment will ever let facts get in the way of marketing or incorrect theories.

Also I urge you to have your club techs learn spine-aligning.  Since your clubs are individually assembled, spine-aligning would be a simple and quick additional step, and would add a measurable increase in performance.  There are abundant data from Golfsmith to support the value of spine-aligning, and I would gladly explain the proper techniques to your techs.

Since this is a patented technique, I am not able to advertise or officially put in writing that I perform spine-alignment.   Unofficially, we do spine-alignment on our clubs.

You also state that your new ironwoods produce greater ball spin than irons.  You should perform ball-spin tests to quantitatively demonstrate their superior spin producing capabilities.

Again, this is a test that does not need to be performed.   As soon as you play with one and stop the ball in far less distance than you ever have with an iron, no testing is necessary.   Knowing the exact number of revolution per minute of greater backspin will not help a golfer.   Backing a ball up out of the rough and out of sand traps is all that golfers need.   Knowing revolutions per minute will not change any golfers result.

My second question is regarding your Lever-Power technique.  Do you think that Lever-Power is the best way to strike a golf ball, or just the easiest way that produces the most consistent results?

If golfers find it easier and more consistent, how can it not be the best way to strike a golf ball.   Lever-Power is the by far the BEST way to strike a golf ball.   The reasons are numerous and explained in detail on my web site.   Moe Norman is all the proof anyone needs.   Lee Trevino had the second best mechanics.   You don't see anyone trying to copy him either.

Meaning that traditional form can produce superior results intermittently, but is difficult to perform and extremely inconsistent.  If a pro dedicates his life to traditional form he MAY produce enough superior results to maybe win a tournament or two, but the average weekend golfer is wasting his time with traditional form.

This is correct.   Only a few thousand golfers out of 50,000,000 can shoot a par round of golf on a daily basis.   These are the few thousand tour players who have practiced and played golf all day every day of their lives since the day they started.   The coordination required to play well with traditional mechanics is beyond the ability of an amateur golfer.   The statistics cannot be disputed.   Male golfers will shoot around 100.   Nothing over the last hundred years has changed this statistic.   Tour players, in general, are around 70% accurate.   This means that they fail 30% of the time.   Amateurs have no chance to get close to this figure.

I think it would be monumental if you created a challenge, whereby 40 weekend golfers are separated into 2 groups.  Both groups play a 4-round weekend tournament to establish a baseline handicap.  For the next 90 days, one group learns Lever Power golf from you, the second group learns traditional form from PGA teaching professionals.  Both groups then play another 4-round weekend tournament and the changes in handicaps are examined, establishing Lever Power golf the vastly superior form.

This would provide proof that LPG is superior.   However, it would cost millions of dollars.   Only if someone like the Golf Channel or a traditional teaching establishment wanted to finance the project, will it ever happen.  It would have to be slightly different from your suggestion.   It takes around six months to make an effective change in short term memory patterns.  The program would have to be six months long.   Next, I will only review students once a month.  I will make them their own teachers.   The traditional teacher can spend as much times as they would like.

I believe that your scientific knowledge and findings should be accepted in the golf industry every bit as much as Dave Pelz' sare.  The only difference between the two of you is that he was able to quantitatively and undeniably demonstrate the veracity of his findings and the superiority of his teachings. (i.e.: The optimum speed to strike a putt is so that it stops 18 inches past the hole, and so on).

Unfortunately, this is a major false perception.   No one in the traditional establishment will ever let facts get in the way of a theory.  And, this is how I like it.   If they actually accept science, they will put me out of business.   I am not interested in changing the minds of traditional teachers or the PGA teachers.   I am only interested in helping amateur golfers enjoy the game.   I don't get them until they have failed enough with traditional.

Lever Power golf needs a quantitative, repeatable demonstration to show golfers and the golf world that there is an easier, better way.

Actually, all it needs is multimillions for advertising.   Again, the traditional establishment will never let facts get in the way of a theory.

Jack

I remember a while back you "refined" your research and decided a 460cc driver with 10.5 degrees of loft is the best for the majority of golfers.   Any feelings on a 460cc head with multi-materials?   You know, these "comp" driver heads that claim to change the weight of the head for maximum performance.   Any benefits of that?

Marketing can make it sound very good.   However, there is a major problem.   By making a club that can correct a fault, you must have the fault in your mechanics.   You can never achieve optimum mechanics, the equipment will not allow it.   If you change just one club to cure a fault, what do you do with your other clubs?

If you see more than 35% of golfers (placebo effect) using a particular type of club, then you can say that it has merit and needs scientific study to understand why.   This is why virtually all driver heads are around the upper limit allowed (470 CC).   Science shows that you will hit the ball farther with more control.

Compensation weighting heads have not shown that the majority of users to be more accurate or longer.   You can always get a testimonial.   Placebo is a part of life.

Jack

Just curious about the new iron woods.  Now with the new 60 degree iron wood do you even need any for the irons since the iron woods can be played from everywhere?

You are correct. I no longer play with any irons. Here is my current set:

Club	Length	Type	Use	Number
460 CC	48"	MaxImpact	Driver	1
9,7,5,3,3+	45"	MaxImpact IronWood	Basic shots	5
L-60	38"	MaxImpact IronWood	80 yards and in	1
3+	36"	MaxImpact IronWood	Fringe to 10 yards	1
Putter	35"	MaxImpact Trevillion Style		1
Total				9

I offer a major discount for members of the armed service.  Contact me if you have an interest in the clubs.

Jack

You would like the answers from a sports psychologist better than the answer I am going to give you.   A sports psychologist will give you a list of perceptions that have never proved to be successful.   However, they will make you feel good about trying to apply them.   Neuroscience books however show that you have allowed the FEAR circuit to take over your golf stroke.   Once this happens and you establish these circuits, they are extremely difficult to impossible to change.   Sandy Lyle and Ian Baker Finch are examples of Golfers, who have won major tournaments, that can no longer play to their potential due to establishing these circuits.   This has been the year of the fear mode.   I have seen more tour professionals allow fear to take over their swings this year than any year I can remember.   Again, Once you establish these circuits, they are extremely difficult to change.

There is only one method that has achieved some success.   It is getting TASK focused.   I explain this method to members of my web site.

Science provides correct information even if it is not what you want to hear.

Jack Kuykendall

DAY ONE

I returned home yesterday after a week away at a conference and funeral; my new clubs were here.   You are right on what you said about the two different kinds of grips being ok; I didn't have any problem with them.  They felt very good. I didn't get out to hit them until 5:30 so didn't have time to play, just to try to learn how to hit them.

The range was closed so I practiced on the course.  I would hit a tee shot, if I missed the fairway I would hit one more.  I then hit to the green.  If I hit the green, I would not hit another ball, if I missed the green with the first I would hit one more.  Following this plan, in 14 holes (before it got dark) I missed only one fairway and two greens.  I did not take the time to putt.  I was dumbfounded.  I hit two shots inside ten feet several inside 25 feet.  Additionally after several holes I went to the far back tees on one hole (459yds.) just to see what I could do.  Driver, 3 ironwood flag high, just off the green.

The ironwoods are everything and more that you said they would be.  I did hit several very strange shots but was amazed at how quickly I started addapting to the clubs and how I began to instinctively slide my hands up and down the grip depending on lie and distance.  It has been raining all day today but I am anxious to see how I do in an actual playing situation.

DAY TWO

I played with my brother yesterday.  He is 10 years younger than I am and very competitive.  He is a 13, I'm a 15.  I thinned 3 iron shots and 3 putted 5 times (very unlike me), I think I was just to anxious to get to the next hole to hit the ironwoods.  I beat him by 8 shots.  Even though he did play poorly (maybe uneasy because of the new quality of my shots), if I had made any putts at all it would have been ugly.

The best thing is this.  Except for the thin iron shots and the occasional fat shot (that getting used to the new clubs and more Iron Law drills will fix) I know about where the ball will be going.  I was resisting the urge to get cocky and call my shots "high draw to back left pin".   I have a lot of improving to do especially with the Iron Law drills but this is the most fun I have had in a long time.

After two weeks of playing, and having many other golfers both hit the clubs on the driving range and play with them on the course, there's only one thing to tell you -  You must find a way to budget for a set of the MaxImpact Iron-Woods.

These clubs allow golf to become euphoric and you will enjoy playing the game beyond anything you can imagine.

Jack Kuykendall's experience with his first 7-rounds.  Shafts" 45"

1st round:

Distances were equal to or longer than the chart for a 100 mph clubhead speed.
Accuracy was not as consistent as irons (First round only).
Backspin was greater than with irons - balls stopped quicker than with irons.
Easy to hit out of rough, ball stopped on green.
Around 20% of shots were fat due to steep up and down motion - must change to sweeping motion.

2nd round:

Distance and trajectory better.
Accuracy equal to irons.
Soft high fades far easier than with irons.
Major backspin from rough, ball stops better from rough with Iron-Woods than irons from fairway.
Fairway sand shots much easier than with irons.
10% fat shots - still working on sweeping the ball rather than taking a divot.

3rd round:

Practiced working the ball on the driving range - soft fades, high and low shots and high and low draws.

When playing:

Worked on using 9 Iron-Wood for finesse from 130 yards to 160 yards - far easier than with irons.
Accuracy better than irons.
Fat shots eliminated - must sweep the ball off the ground.
Workability improved - tried many soft fades and draws - 75% success.

4th and 5th round:

All shots superior to iron shots.
Worked ball far easier.
Backspin from sand and rough is superior to irons from the fairway.
Beyond any expectation I could have had.

6th and 7th round:

Euphoria has set in. I just had two of the most fun rounds of golf I have ever played.
Hit 13 of 14 fairways in regulation (having essentially one swing with all clubs has made the driver more accurate).
The missed fairway was two feet into 3" rough.  The ball was sitting down in the grass.  The hole was a 457 yard par 4.   I was 180 yards from the green (277 yard drive).  I hit the MaxImpact Iron-Wood number 8.  The ball landed even with the pin and about 3-feet to the right.  The ball stopped 15 feet past the pin. The ball had major backspin out of deep rough.
Hit all 18 greens in regulation with an easier LPG stroke.
Did not putt - was just working on fairways and greens.

WHEN YOUR BUDGET ALLOWS, PURCHASE THESE CLUBS!

Remember Scigolf's no interest, 3 payment plan and Natural Golf, IMA, and Impact clubs get a trade-in allowance.

Jack

This is a legitimate question?   Science never stops improving.   I have not changed the basics of my system since I started it in 1987.   As refinements that make it better are discovered, they are added.   This is what science is all about.   History, shows that there is no such thing as a final theory.   There is only the best theory of the time.

My MaxImpact Irons are the best irons ever produced.   My new MaxImpact Iron-Woods will replace them and make golf even better.   I would suggest that you stop reading any of my material because there will always be a next and a next.   My comparisons will always be between what traditional companies and teacher believe versus science.   I will always win.

The disgrace to the great game of golf is the traditional establishment and their false perceptions.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

That is correct for the method the few companies who have attempted a make a one club length system.   The maximum distance spread you can get from loft is only around 10 yards when the clubhead speed is the same.   This is only for golfers who have over 100 mph of clubheads speed.   For the average golfer who is between 80 and 95 mph of clubhead speed, you will only have around an 8 yard spread.   This allows for a seven club spread to have between 64 and 70 yards distance.   An average golfer with a 90 mph clubhead speed that hits his 9-iron about 110 yards, will have a maximum distance of 174 yards with his longest iron.

This is the technology and it has failed miserably!

My MaxImpact technology start the 90 mph clubhead speed MaxImpact 9 Iron-Wood at 142 yards, and allows for 206 yards with the MaxImpact 3 Iron-Wood.

Now you're selling clubs that are all the same length and weight as your driver.

My new MaxImpact Iron-Woods are NOT the same length and weight as my driver.   The chart on the Scigolf and on my web site shows the various lengths that are offered.

Only the lofts are the same.

The loft are NOT the same.   The lofts vary by 4-degrees from the 9 Iron-Wood to the 3 Iron-Wood.   This is what allows the 8 to 10 yard spread.

Is this for real or are you just trying to see if we're paying attention?

Not only is it for real, the MaxImpact Iron-Woods are the clubs the majority of the world's golfers should be using.

What is the scientific basis for this change?

The companies who have tried using just one length and head weight started with an average length club (Tommy Armour's Equals used the 6 iron as their standard).   The short irons went to far and the long irons did not go far enough.

The other major change is going from a iron head to a specially designed head that is easier to hit than an iron.

The MaxImpact Iron-Woods produce greater backspin than irons from the fairway.   They also produce backsping from the rough and sand that is equal to or greater than iron backspin from a fairway.   You can stop a ball on hard greens from the rough or fairway sand traps with the MaxImpact Iron-Woods.

Are you using them?

Not just YES, but HELL YES!   The MaxImpact Iron-Woods are too incredible for words.   You simply have to hit one to be in absolute disbelief over how long and accurate can you become with a shorter and easier swing.

There is a day by day description of my experience for the first seven rounds on my web site.   Golf has become euphoric.

Does that mean you only use irons for the wedges?

From approximatley 120 yards and closer.

Another question:   In putting you say that the longer the club the more difficult to control and yet the opposite is proposed for these clubs.   What am I missing?

Hitting the clubs and dispelling any doubt you could have that an individual scientist could outperform all other golf companies when it comes to optimum golf.

Jack

I start all putts between 5 and 8 inches behind the ball.   I take no backstroke on putts inside of 5 feet.   I take a 4 to 6 inch backstroke on longer putts.

Jack

Glad to post them and thank you for your efforts.

Jack

Animation 1

Animation 2

Whitney, Your question is anything but trivial.   It is the difference between success and to use your word - mediocre.

I am a Division 3 college golfer.  I have been playing for about 8 years, and I just can't seem to be better than mediocre.

This is due to lack of scientific knowledge about your swing mechanics and the all important FEAR FACTOR (FEAR as defined by Dr. Joseph LeDoux in his book "The Emotional Brain").

I go to lessons with my pro,

I am sure he is sincere about wanting to help.   However, he also lacks scientific knowledge and is teaching you his perceptions.   I do not need to know what or how he teaches to know that it is non-optimum.

or I play on my own, and I hit the ball pure and I make putts and I finish even.

Science explains why you have a driving range swing, a swing when you play by yourself, a swing when your with your favorite group and your competitive swing - FEAR is the separator.

But when I go out the next day, to my tournaments, I walk off the course with an 85...or worse.

You are not the only one.   Watch every tournament on the LPGA and the PGA each week and you will see players succumb to the fear mode.

I am getting to the point, where I don't really know what else to do.

The science is straightforward and neuronal patterns for success can begin to become effective, in short term memory, in as little as 90 days of work.  It will take about six months of work to establish short term memory patterns that you can count on.

I desperately want to fix my mental approach, because I only have one season left.

If you started training as soon as possible, you could have a successful last year.

If you have any words of wisdom for me, I would greatly appreciate it,

I have better than words of wisdom, I have scientific knowledge that will allow you to reach your potential.

because its almost becoming too frustrating.

For you and millions of other golfers.  When you are playing with lack of knowledge, it is extremely frustrating.  When you obtain and apply scientific knowledge, frustration can turn to euphoria.

If your college has funds for a guest teacher, I can help.

Jack

Thanks for the update on be coming your own teacher and improving your game.   98% of my students are golfers like you.   Golf mechanics are laughably simple.   Learning them is just the opposite.   You must have optimum scientific information and training aids that allow you to change your brain patterns. LPG is the only system that provides a scientific answer and method to attain your golfing potential.

When you try to change a mechanical brain pattern, the first thirty days will be very frustrating and you will have more poor shots than good shots - brain patterns are between both techniques.   The next 60 days will gradually shift to the short-term-memory patterns becoming stronger than you long-term current memory patterns.   Around the 90-day time frame, your number of quality golf shots with the new LPG patterns should be equal to or better than you old mechanics.   During the next 90-days, LPG patterns should be able to be stronger than you old mechanical patterns and you scores and quality and quantity of good shots should be greater than you old mechanics.   As you continue to perform the IRON LAW DRILLS, you will reach an optimum level of mechanics.   This is when golf really become fun.

Keep me posted on your results.

Jack

Ben,   Since Hamm is the only one promoting the technology, it is not possible to give a scientific opinion.   The products he sold in the past were marketing hype.   None of them performed better than competitive products.   Shaft technology with round shaft is very advanced with science to back up the claims.   If you see tour players starting to use them and getting even more distance, then it may have some merit.

Jack

You are 100% correct.   I will have a scientific analysis of Hardy's theory on my web site within a week.   Below is the starting paragraph.  If you overlay the last two photos of Jacobsen, they are identical.   I have never seen a good player, let alone a tour professional be in either of his address positions.   His advise on stance width for the different swing is almost too stupid to comment on.   Both grips displayed are non-optimum.  I have never seen a good player in the backstroke positions he shows on page 104.   The only golfer I have ever seen in his one plane prior to impact position is Jim Furyk.   Hardy makes it into the M group.

The M-GROUP.   They Misinterpret and then Misinform, Mislead and Misguide until golf instruction is a Mishmash of opinions that cause you Misery.

• Misinterpret:   to understand or explain wrongly
• Misinform:       to give false or misleading information
• Mislead:           to lead in a wrong direction or into a mistaken action or belief
• Misguidance:  faulty guidance
• Mishmash:       hodgepodge and jumble
• Misery:             emotional distress

Jack

I will be posting a scientific analysis of Jim Hardy's perceptions on my web site within the next two weeks and show that his conclusions are scientifically false.   Dr. Ralph Mann has shown that their are NO single plane swing when you have a two-axis right forearm to clubshaft angle.   It is scientifically impossible to rotate a two-axis system on one plane.

Golf Digest starts the article with the statement that Jim Hardy is the most knowledgeable golf-swing-scholar you've never heard of.

If Golf Digest had not printed this false and misleading article, there would be no need to go through another lengthy science article showing that it is false and misleading and will not help a single golfer improve.   However, it fits in with Golf Digest's Tips Merry-go-round; keep golfers confused on a monthly basis and they will purchase your magazine forever.

You will also see numerous testimonials of how a golfer just read the article and took numerous strokes of his game and hit the ball better than ever.   All of the testimonials are false because the brain does not work that way.   Any improvement will be in-spite-of and not because-of this article.

Jack

Your next step in your journey should be a membership to my science web site on the golf swing.   Your search for the answers and understanding would be over.

Here's a couple of comments/questions.

Have you ever read a book called "The Science of the Golf Swing".  It's a book written in 1969 by a man called David Williams Who used a strobe picture of Bobby Jones swing to calculate what makes the clubhead go ~ 5 times faster than the hands.  He calculated the forces applied to the grip end of the club that are required to make the club move in the manner observed.  His conclusion was that nearly all the force applied to the shaft was ALONG the length of the shaft NOT at right angles to it.

His conclusion is the same as everyone else in the industry and it is incorrect.

He stated that centrifugal force is what accelerates the clubhead to move around 5 times faster than the hands.

Since there is no such thing as centrifugal force, he is absolutely wrong.

He calculated Bobby Jones hands were traveling at about 34 ft/sec at impact and the clubhead was moving at 165 ft/sec.

This is a simple observation that does not take a strobe to see.  Simple video frames show this ratio for most good golfers.   The power that produces the 5 to 1 ratio comes from the trailing arm and forearm rotation.

He also calculated the outward pull of the clubhead at impact to be about 107 lbs.

The inertia of the clubhead would produce an outward force on the arms and body of about 107 lbs.   There is NO outward force on the clubhead.  The only force on the clubhead is the inward force of the body ( accounts for about 20 mph of clubhead speed) and the force on the grip by the hands (that accounts for about 80 mph of clubhead speed.)

In Cochran/Stobbs book "The Search for the Perfect Swing" there is a picture on one of the pages of 2 one armed golfers.  Both have their left arms only and one of them can drive up to 280yrds.  What in your opinion would be accelerating the club in his case?

The rotation of the left forearm and through impact.  I have a right arm only person on my web site that hits the ball over 330 yards.

How would you prove your theory about the right wrist flexing to provide power? V Have you done a EMG to show when the relevant forearms muscles contract in relation to where the clubhead is?

The experiments have already been done by another source.  The data and proof are in one of the articles on my web site.

Like yourself I'm in search of the truth.

The truth is just and your search for the answers is just a membership and a lot reading away.

Let's try to not our opinions stand in front of it.

I don't use opinions.  I use science.  If you decide to become a member of my web site, the first thing I want all new members to do is to prove any statement I make to be incorrect or need a modification.   Over 18 years, there has not been a single case of anyone showing that any statement on the site is incorrect.

Jack

Hi, Your articles are interesting.   How do you develop fast twitch arm muscles?

You perform a specific number of repetitions at high speed with a resistance greater than that used in the movement.   For golf, that is performing high speed movements for the arms with a Power Swing Fan or a slightly weighted club head (about 2 ounces).   Heavy weights moved slower are of no use (Momentus, for example).   Programs for the body are of no use because the body is a stabilizer.

Jack Kuykendall

I am not going to use ideas.   I am going to use physic mechanics 101.   Moe Norman's clubhead speed was 99 mph with a lauch angle of around 18 degrees and a spin rate of around 1500 RPM.   Moe's air carry was around 250 yards -- a good 20 yards farther than with a 3000 + spin rate.

Your angle of attach is too steep.   You need to flatten your swing and swing from low to high through impact with correct rotation of the hands.  This power move and correct rotation of the hands is explained in detail on my membership website.   Most tour players have between 2000 and 2400 RPM of backspin.

Jack Kuykendall

Yes, I use a separated hand grip.

Do you just rotate both forearms, or do you release the trail wrist?   If you start the rotation at 8:oo you must begin to rotate very quickly.   Is that correct?   Finally, do you just allow the lower body to follow the lead of the arms, and do you still believe in a wide stance?

Answering the three questions will not help you play better golf.   This is the Tips Merry-Go-Round.  No one instruction can ever make a golf stroke better.   One incorrect instruction can cause you to never acquire correct mechanics.   If you want to reach your golfing potential, you need to follow the three steps outlined on my web site.

Jack

Todd is very nice young man, but his knowledge of Single Axis and how to teach is incorrect.

Even though the Lever action swing looked odd to me, I tried it in the back yard. I was amazed how strong and fast the swing feels.   I tried it at the driving range with some success.   I was happy for a first time trial.   I did shank several, but assume that was my lower body getting too involved.   I am going to keep perfecting my version of this swing.

Unfortunately you are doomed to failure.   You are trying to make a change with limited knowledge and tips.   Science does not allow you to succeed.

The big thing was I had no elbow pain.  Also, you are correct, there was no strain on the back or shoulders.

Bending of the left arm does cure all three of those problems.

The swing really felt powerful.  Us old guys, I'm 58, can now hit it as far as before.  Thanks.

And the younger guys will hit farther than they do now.   Optimum Physics does have an age limit.

P.S. I recognized your name from the old "Golf Magazine" regarding Moe in 1995, so I knew it would be worthwhile.  I love your scientific approach.

You should give it a real try by becoming a member of my web site and following all the instructions.

Jack

Not as of today.   None of them have chosen to let facts get in the way of their theories.

If so , what were their results?  Did they keep more of them in the 40 yard grid and did they gain any distance ?

Anyone who will change to LPG will increase distance and accuracy.

I am interested due to my entering of my first long drive competition.  I found your method of creating a longer lever at the elbow instead of the wrist interesting.

Cocking of the left wrist is just motion that must be recovered from.  it is the cocking of the right wrist that produces the clubhead speed.

I am not a golfer by any stretch of the imagination.  I can just swing the club very fast. I am not a consistent ball striker either, but I figure since I know so little about the golf swing and am open to new thoughts and methods, your swing mechanics might be interesting to try.

If you spent 6 months training correctly with LPG and your current clubhead speed is over 135 mph, you could win the long drive competitions.

I'll see if I can crank out a few mph more club head speed emulating the swing I downloaded from your site.

These mechanics are laughable simple.   Establishing an effective pattern in your brain is NOT.  Trying to learn this on your own for high level competition is not advisable.   You need to take a personal lesson from me if want to succeed in the shortest time.

Jack

No.  All swings are controlled by the mechanical neuronal patterns.  He has established different neuronal patterns for each swing.

Also, I have seen Lee Trevino's swing from behind and it does not look like his trailing forearm is parallel to the shaft with the driver.

Depending on exactly where you were standing, you can see anything you want.  Most people see their perceptions no matter what the reality.  One's eyes are never a good judge of any mechanical motion.

With the shorter clubs it does look parallel.

Again, your eyes are providing incorrect perceptions.

Since Lee is supposed to be single axis,

Trevino is not single axis.  I do not know where you obtained this incorrect information.

my explanation is: If he pushed the clubhead out to the ball (he sets up with toe of club at ball) and turned his trailing hand a little stronger Bob Toski   (JK: Toski made so many incorrect statements that to quote him would be like quoting the New York Times)   once said Trevino strenghtened his trailing hand on the backswing) then Trevino would look as single axis as he is?

This is an exercise in frustration.  Analyzing Tiger's swing with Trevino's swing and comments from Toski, is not logical to me.  There is no comparison.  Trevino was and is one of top ball strikers of all time.  Tiger has a violent traditional swing that he will never be able to time effectively.  Tiger has the greatest short game of anyone to ever play the game.  That is the only reason he will become one of the greatest golfers of all times.  It will never be because of his full swing mechanics.  Tiger is working on changing something that he has no scientific knowledge of.  All he can ever change is incorrect perceptions.  He will never hit more fairways or greens than he did in 2000 and 2001.  He had reached his timing barrier and nothing can ever change that as long as continues with his violent traditional mechanics.

Every time Tiger makes a change, you will see him play worse and maybe eventually get back to where he was before he made the change.  He will not move to a higher level of play.  He can never own his swing like Moe Norman or Ben Hogan because he does not and will never have either one of their mechanics.

Jack

Jack

Hi Jack,

Just thought I would pass on these few quotes I've read on the Golf Digest Website recently.

Calcavecchia, whose grandfather hailed from Sicily, is battling a list of maladies.   "I have constant back pain, my knees creak, my feet hurt and my brain is shot, but I won't use it as an excuse. My golf just stank."

Scott Hoch, who has battled wrist problems for the last few years and has played just twice in '05, is out until at least July as he tries to rehabilitate a left arm that has both a muscle tear in the forearm and a floating bone chip in the arm.

Arron Oberholer withdrew during the second round of the Wachovia Championship due to back and hip problems, but he is entered this week in Texas.

Rocco Mediate withdrew because of a recurrence of his chronically bad back.

Chris DiMarco posted his third straight top-5 finish in Charlotte despite nearly withdrawing prior to the tournament because of a neck strain.   X-rays came back negative for bone or nerve damage.

Pain and stiffness in the back and neck are usually caused by the twisting motion of the golf swing as the shoulders rotate around the hips.  This twisting of the torso in a coil fashion can put enormous pressure on the vertebrae, muscles and ligaments of the spine especially during the recovery phase.   Indeed when one addresses the ball the bent back puts one in a most vulnerable position.   Not surprisingly the US PGA cites lower back pain as the dominate golf injury.  Makes you wonder why people still want to play in the conventional way!

I have removed the 5 degree information from the web site and no longer offer the 5 degree driver.   A 5 degree driver will hit the ball the longest, but it also will be less accurate due to gear effect side spins.

The new 460 CC 10.5 degree head provides long distance and far less gear effect.  I am only selling the 10.5 degree 460 CC head as this optimum for 99% of players.

Jack

From George:

About 3 months ago I traded a NG P3 9 iron for the MaxImpact 9 iron.

What an incredible piece of equipment.   This is the club of the future.   All that goes into the assembly of the club pays dividends on the course.  Previous 9 iron swing resulted in 130 - 140 yard distance.   With the MaxImpact, easily 150 - 160 yards.   The ball jumps off the club.   When I am warmed up, I can hit a 5 iron about 225 yards.  I can hardly wait to get a full set of MaxImpact irons and see what distances result.   Jack, thank you, thank you, thank you.

Put a stop to these shameless self promotions!  Send in your questions for Jack

Don

A preshot routine is just to get your conscious mind out of the way of the subconscious.   There is no better or best, and there is no correct or incorrect.   The preshot routine that allows you to have only a few sensations while hitting acceptable shots is the goal.

When you watch the tour players, you will see all extremes.   I personally cannot watch Phil Michelson or Jim Furyk putt.   They walk all over the place, back away from the ball, look at the putt for every and from numerous directions.   This works for them.   However, neither of them are great putters.   Michelson is famous for chocking when the heat is on in a Major.

A preshot routine is helpful.  It does not necessarily equate to success.

Jack

The formulas for balancing clubs are on my web site.   It is not just balancing from the butt.   You need total weight, 1st and 2nd moment of inertia balancing.   This means following an exact equation as to where to place weights.   I do not give out the formulas I use.   They took me 5 years and thousands of dollars to develop.

Jack

There will always be perceptionist in the golf industry that make false claims - especially one with a new piece of equipment.   One factor that can never be changed is clubhead speed.   When all other conditions are the same, clubhead speed will be the determining factor for distance.

What they would check on their fancy electronically wired club was the lag point at which the club was loaded, launch angle and ball speed and spin.   They wouldn't check club angle coming into the ball or swing plane.

Three of the four are useful.   Launch angle, ball speed and spin are the three.   Loading and unloading a shaft has not been proven to me by any scientific means.   I cover this information in the physics section and equipment driver section on the web site.

The higher the launch angle, the greater the distance.   Tee the ball high and swing from low to high through impact.

Spin determines air carry.   The greater the spin the more the air moves the ball upward and backward. The lower the spin, the more the ball bores through the air.   The oversized 460 CC clubheads make this happen for any golfer swinging low to high with a high launch angle.

Ball speed is directly related to clubhead speed and how close you are to the center of gravity of the clubface at impact.   If you hit the center of gravity, you will have the greatest ball speed per clubhead speed.

They basically wanted to sell me new clubs and offered to check my loft and lie.   I know these are fine and said that I really just wanted to check my swing plane and clubhead speed.

The next time you encounter them, ask them if they do scientific assembly of total weight, 1st and 2nd moment of inertia balancing as explained in Jorgensen's "Physics of Golf."   Their answer will be, DUH!

He showed me charts on the wall that he said analyzed the swings of Greg Norman, Ernie Els and Tommy Armour.   He said they showed that Ernie loaded his swing at the beginning of the downswing, took nearly 5 seconds to finish the swing and was losing speed and power at the end of the swing.   He also said that it showed that Tommy loaded his power late in the swing and was taking 3 seconds to complete the swing and was gaining speed at impact.

This must be incorrect.   There is no one who take longer than 0.33 second during the downstroke.   All tour professionals have maximum clubhead speed through impact.   It makes no difference if the clubhead is accelerating, slowing down or maintaining constant velocity during impact.   The ball is in contact with the clubhead for less than 0.0005 seconds.   There is nothing a golfer, a shaft or a ball can do during that period of time to make a difference.   The only factors that matter are the COR of the clubhead, the COR of the ball and how close the impact is to the center of gravity of the clubface.

He also said that a golfer swinging a clubhead speed of 80 mph could hit the ball as far as a 100 mph swing depending on launch angle and ball spin.

That is false.   This is too large a separation in clubhead speed.   It would be possible for a golfer with an optimum launch angle and spin rate with a clubhead speed of 90 MPH versus a golfer with a clubhead speed of 100 MPH and the least optimum launch angle and spin rate.   Moe Norman's clubhead speed with a driver was 100 MPH.   He had a spin rate of around 1500 RPM and a launch angle of close to 18 degrees.   Moe could air carry about 250 yards.   The average amateur with 100 MPH of clubhead speed has over 3000 RPM and a launch angle of around 10 to 12 degrees.   Amateurs air carry around 230 yards at 100 MPH of clubhead speed.   If both golfers have the optimum launch angle and spin rate, the one with the highest clubhead speed will hit the ball farther.

He showed me a very flexible club that bent easily and said that the speed and power came from the flexing of the shaft and not the clubhead speed.

Shaft flex has to do with ball flight height.   The more flexible, the higher the flight.   I have tested many golfers using the most flexible to a very stiff shaft and found only a minimal change in distance.   One gets there by air carry and the other gets there with roll.   If you need a higher launch angle, play a less flexible shaft.

I'm confused.

PGA perceptionist have been confusing golfers for close to a hundred years.

Jack

From Jeff:

I was discussing the mechanics of the golf swing with my brother, who is a scratch golfer, golf instructor, club maker, and winner of several long drive contests.   He pointed out a few things that don't seem to be addressed in your discussion on the physics of the golf swing and I was hoping you could help me understand them.

The first thing that would help is if you became a member of my web site.   All the question you have are answered on the site.   All of your assumption are incorrect.   I hope your brother does not give lessons. There has to be a lot of golfers in a lot of pain if he does.

First, regarding the muscles engaged in the golf swing for power, he pointed out that the muscles engaged most in the golf swing are those that would hurt the most if you went to a driving range and hit 500 balls.

This is as incorrect as possible for a golf instruction.   It is as incorrect a Jim McLean X-Factor and Y-Factor.   If you feel any torque or pain during an optimum golf stroke, you are doing something incorrect.

Simply put, the muscles you use most are those that hurt most because of overuse (other than the pain caused by twisting the back inappropriately).

You only create muscular soreness from incorrect use of a trained muscle.   There should never be overuse of a muscle during a golf practice or playing.

The muscles that you fail to address are (for a right-handed golfer): 1) the muscle between the shoulders that moves the left shoulder back to square at the beginning of the down swing, and 2) the left rotator cuff (?) which rotates the left shoulder through its socket in order to bring the left arm straight at impact.

This is the straight left arm method of swinging.   When straight, the left arm is in its weakest and most vulnerable position for injury.   A straight left arm is how much pain do you want in your backstroke and how much do you want to slow down your clubhead speed through impact.

I must confess that these muscles always hurt when I hit too many balls, and it's easy to feel them engage during the downswing.

That is because they do with the inefficient straight left arm mechanics.   This should have been the clue that you are doing something incorrectly.

These muscles seem to contribute significantly to the initial speed of the club head, more so than any muscle on the right side of the body.

You are equating pain with speed.   Because you are in great pain, does not mean that you are creating speed.   The left arm and hand form the lower fulcrum.   They are in their weakest position when straight.   They can do nothing but hurt and support.

Furthermore, you could hit 10,000 golf balls and never experience soreness in your right triceps.

This is because it is contracting with great efficiency and well within its load capability.

Could it be that the right triceps is simply responding to the force created by the contraction of the left rotator-cuff by virtue of the fact that both hands are holding the club?

This is where you absolutely incorrect!   This is why there are so many left rotator cuff injuries.   The left rotator cuff is only strong enough to support.   When used to try to create speed is when golfer injure themselves.

That seems to be a more accurate description of what is happening.

Only to someone who has no training in anatomy or science.   Your perceptions are 100% opposite of what happens.

Second, the club shaft is designed to absorb and release energy through the bending and straightening events.   The moment you start the downswing you create flex in the shaft that, when the club is swung properly, isn't straightened until shortly before impact.   This, not muscle action, results in significant power because of the rapid "snap" of the club through impact.   The flex of the shaft must be matched to the swing of the person in order to generate maximum "snap" through impact.

I would be curious to see the results of your experiments that show this great "snap" increase in clubhead speed.   I have tested many golfers with very flexible to extra stiff shafts and find only a small difference in distance.

Finally, because we are using a lever from our body to the ball, the small movements of the central part of the body result in a large movement at the end of the lever.

Really!   Would you be specific and go through how the momentum is transferred.   On, my web site, I show that it is impossible to transfer the body's momentum into the arms.

The beginning of the downswing causes the shaft to flex and other muscles to stretch.

Again, would be specific for us on which muscles stretch.  Simple observation of muscles show this to be false.

You conclusion that the larger muscles contribute little to the overall speed because the club head doesn't move much when they are engaged may be flawed.

All you have to do is give a scientific description of the error and I will be glad to post it to my web site.   I show the exact muscles that are contracting and the exact levers that are being used.   The big muscles have virtually no contribution to clubhead speed.   The big muscles have a big contribution as support for the speed producing arms.

To the contrary, they generate stored energy (via the stretching of muscles and flexing of shaft) that must be released at some point.

The stored energy in the body is released as heat.   The flexing shaft contributes only a few mph.

That release is delayed until shortly before the moment of impact due to the nature of the swing.   The fact that it is a delayed release of energy does not mean that the muscles engaged at the moment of release are the real cause of the observed energy (i.e. the increase in speed).   There would be little increase in speed if we didn't create any flex in the shaft nor any stretch of some of the other muscles.

Yes there is.   When the arm levers straighten and the forearms rotate through impact, you get maximum clubhead speed.

What do you think of these arguments?

They are the arguments of a person no knowledge in science and anatomy.   These are the arguments of the current SPIN authorities.   You don't understand science,so you just regurgitate the current dogma.

They seem to rely on physics as much as your arguments do,

You have not stated a single physics or anatomy principle.   You have given the perceptions of your brother.   They are all false and dangerous.

and they do seem to correspond to what you feel when you swing a club.

What you and your brother "feel' is just that.   It what you "feel".   It is 100% opposite of an efficient golf stroke.

They also account for the club shaft's contribution to the speed of the club head at impact.

Please share data of your testing with rest of us.

Thanks for your input.

You are very welcome. I hope I was able to assist you.

Jack

Those of you who do not subscribe to Jack's magazine may have missed his article on putting.   "Paul Trevillion's Putting Technique is one of the best I've ever tried," Jack Kuykendall.

Take a look at Putting on Scigolf for a fuller description.

I am answering this one because it is made me laugh.  A baseball bat has a speed of far less than 100 mph.   A pro golfer can have speed in excess of 130 mph.   The golfer wins.

Jack

Yes, you and any golfer can achieve optimum mechanics.   The real question is are you willing to use science and follow the instructions.   You have a permanent brain pattern for the mechanics that you currently possess.   They will never go away.   They can be made weaker and new patterns established which will become the dominant patterns.   The first thirty days will be a disaster.   You are changing brain patterns and your brain hates to change it patterns.   You must stick to the drills until short term memory has a pattern that is stronger than the long term memory pattern.   That takes around 90 days.   In six months the short term memory pattern will be stronger and you will be playing the best golf of your life.   It take two full years of performing the drills to put the new patterns into long term memory.   If you are willing to give science two years, you will have optimum mechanics that will last you the rest of your life.

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

The first is knowledge.   That is a membership to the web site.  This provides scientific knowledge on physics, anatomy, kinesiology, neuroscience, fitness and nutrition.   The cost for membership is $60.   This site is strictly a WEB site.  There is nothing mailed to your home.  You have access to all the member sections and permission to print out the sections for your personal use.  This provides the knowledge to understand the golf stroke.

The second step is to purchase the LPG training kit ($260).   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 position 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.

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

Also, I'm about 6"4" tall..........with a swing speed of around 85mph.

We can increase that with LPG mechanics.

Can you make clubs to fit me?

Yes, I can fit all golfers with scientifically perfect clubs.

Jack Kuykendall
Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

The calculation are on my web site under physics and momentum.   There is a link above.

Jack

The distance from the right hand to the clubhead is approximately the same for my system as traditional.   Because Single-Axis requires the hands to be separated, you must move the left hand up (not the right hand down).   When you move the left hand up, there is nothing to hold.   The clubs need to be 2" longer with a separated hand grip in order to have the same effective lever lengths.

Jack

Thank you for your comment.  Properly applied science works every time it's tried.

Jack

The best source for spine alignment is with Golfsmith.   They have articles and the explanations.

Jack

I do not have a distributor of my products in Australia at this time.   The best I have to offer is to purchase one club.   We keep the specifications and match the future clubs.

Follow up from Tom:

What is the best way to choose a driver to suit my swing?

Driver specification are very easy.  I make all drivers 47" men and 46" for women.   The shaft flex is based on clubhead speed or the distance a person hits a driver.   The loft will 10.5 degrees for 99% of players.   This is the optimum loft with the new 460 CC heads.

Jack

All the great ball strikers sit down as the first move in the downstroke.   Go to my web site under kinesiology.   You need to forget all Natural Golf instructions.   You need to stop listening to all golf instructors; especially the ones who told you the sit down is why you hit fat.   Watch the videos.   Here are the three main reasons you hit fat.

Hitting the ball fat is caused by one of three mechanical faults:

1. Standing too close to the ball:
   There is always extension of the arms due to the inertia of the club moving away from the body.  You need to compensate for this extension by moving farther from the ball.   Start with ½" increments until you find the correct distance.

2. Head rotation:
   When you rotate your head to see ball flight, your right shoulder will drop and the clubhead will go into the ground.   You should have the sensation that your right shoulder stays up and back until your arms force it move.

3. Uncocking the left wrist:
   The left wrist must pass through impact exactly as the LPG trainer forces it to.   Do not let the left wrist uncock on the downstroke.  Make sure your first motion in the downstroke is backward and downward with the arms with no uncocking of the left wrist.  At waist high in the downstroke, rotate the forearms while straighten the right arm levers.  If the left wrist keeps the angle you established at address, you will not hit fat.

   Jack

   ---

   From Liam:

   Can you give me the lie angles of your clubs?

   My lie angles are different from traditional clubs.   Knowing them will be of little use.

   As I believe this to be the most important and misunderstood detail of a golf clubs make up ?

   Lie angles are not misunderstood by any clubmaker.  All irons need to have the lie angles set correctly. However, this is not the most important part of club design or assembly.   Lie angle is just a mechanical adjustment that needs to be performed.

   More from Liam:

   The reason I am curious about the lie angles of your clubs is because I adhere to the theory that a more upright lie angle produces a more upright swing plane , which in turn , produces a straighter shot.

   There is no statistical evidence that an upright swing plane offers any advantage.   The exact opposite is the method of virtually all of the great golfers.

   I have had my current set of Taylor Made's moved to 4 degrees upright.

   There has not been a single case where I had to make my clubs more upright.   Most need to be flattened by 2 to 6 degrees.

   This meant that I had to shorten the shaft length of my clubs , which I presumed would mean a loss of distance . However much to my surprise , the opposite has occurred !!!   I am now hitting the ball much straighter , and much farther , that ever before .

   This violates physics.   Shorter levers do not provide more distance.   Only a connected body rotation swing could cause a lower clubhead speed with longer levers.   If you are getting more distance with a shorter lever, you may be using your arms correctly.

   I can only presume that the confidence of hitting a straighter shot ( because of the upright lie angle , which in turn produces, a more upright swing plane) and the confidence of making better ball contact (because of the shorter shaft length) have both added to me producing more swing force , which in turn , produces a longer , straighter shot ?   But whatever the reason for my rapid improvement , you can now see I hope , why I find the lie angle of any club so very important ?

   If you are happy with your clubs, I would suggest that you stay with them.  I would not sell you my clubs until I could see your swing in person or at the very least, on video.   Making the lies upright is not the way to go.   I will not sell or fit a customer based on him providing the lie angle specifications.   I only believe in scientific optimization and I have never had a user need my clubs more upright.   Doesn't mean it can't happen, but it would be a first.

   Jack

   ---

   From Terje:

   I have read about your Lever-Power-Golf system, and I would like to try it.  But before I order your training package, I would like some comments from you.

   First, let me introduce myself.  I am 67 years old, a Norwegian, a high handicapper, and I picked up golf only 3 1/2 years ago.  I started with CG.  After a few months I happened to read about Moe Norman and switched to Natural Golf, as there is a NG instructor in Norway.  As my knowledge about golf in general is very limited, I have been surfing a lot on the Internet lately.  I found the Graves brothers (in fact they found me), and for the first time I was made aware that you don't have to buy NG-clubs to play single axis golf.   I play with NG clubs (450 pipeline irons, BeCu fairway woods and the ST Hammer, 420/10,5).  Is it ok to try your LPG system with these clubs?

   The false and misleading information supplied by the copycats causes me great distress.  I feel some responsibility for the damage they have done to golf and golfers.   They produce so many failures, that single-axis golf has become the laughing stock of traditional golf.   Natural Golf and all the other copycat systems have no real scientific understanding of single-axis and NO understanding of the neuronal process for learning a new skill.

   Scott Hazledine is the only exception and has an acceptable, though complex mechanical version of single-axis golf.   There is only one place to learn the optimum and easiest way to play single-axis golf and that is from the inventor.   I am the only teacher of my discovery to be recognized by a major golf publication as one of the top teachers in the world.   All the copycats make claims that are false or misleading.

   On the subject of clubs, Natural Golf clubs are virtually not useable.   I give a 25% trade in on them and break them in half and throw them away.   You cannot learn single-axis effectively with Natural Golf clubs.   Find a set of blade clubs and install my grips.   This will be the least expensive and an acceptable method for learning.

   Then, when searching for information about golf clubs, a Norwegian club maker made me aware of Scigolf.  My first stop has been Scott Hazledine.  I have bought his DVDs, and at present I am practicing the exercises he recommends (indoors).  I am very well satisfied with his DVDs.  They are so much better than the DVDs I have previously bought from Natural Golf.

   As stated earlier, Scott has an acceptable and usable method.   It has the disadvantage of having excessive body rotation and this complicates the mechanics.

   Honestly, I did not pay much attention to the LPG info in the Scigolf web site.  The demo pictures looked very strange to me.  However, I subscribed to your Golf Science Magazine.  That is really interesting!

   You have taken the first of three steps to achieve your potential in golf.   This first step is knowledge.   My Golf Science Magazine provides you knowledge in physics, anatomy, kinesiology, neuroscience, fitness and nutrition.   You will be able to make decision based on scientifically provable facts rather than the false and misleading feelings and perceptions of the copycats.

   I have been quite confused with all the different interpretations of Moe Norman's swing.  If I engage myself in one more swing technique, will it just add to the frustration, or might it be the "end of the road" for me.  It's time to settle down.

   If you think you are confused with only about 10 different false and incorrect opinion on single-axis, think how a conventional golfer must feel with thousands of false and incorrect feeling and perceptions.   My Golf Science Magazine provides real understanding that is backed by fact and not feeling and perceptions.

   If I order your package, what other training aids would you recommend?

   My three-part program allows you to reach your golfing potential.  Subcribe to my magazine, purchase the LPG training kit and call, email or send a video to me so I can support you.

   Jack Kuykendall
   Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

   ---

   From Frank:

   According to conservation of momentum, the speed of the club head will impart a velocity to the ball resulting in x distance.  If a new swing is faster at impact by 10%, will the ball go 10% farther?

   Yes, by the momentum equation with the same impact conditions.

   ignoring for now the coefficient of restitution change due to heat generated, also the increased wind resistance?

   However, you cannot ignore these parameters.   These parameters make a big difference.

   Would it be wrong to say that the increased distance would be the ratio of the velocities squared times the original distance?

   NO!   Kinetic energy is velocity squared.   It has nothing to with momentum exchange.   The velocity squared term come into effect in determining how much more effort must be applied to achieve a 10% higher clubhead speed.

   I am not asking this to be a smart ass.

   You are asking a very sensible question.   Almost everyone gets the kinetic energy incorrect.

   It is a real question. I am seeing conflicting versions of the solution to this question.  What site may have empirical data about this?  I've seen a site that verifies this.

   My web site has all the calculation performed for you.   The web site that has a velocity squared in the momentum equation is incorrect.

   Jack

   ---

   From Owen:

   We are trying to estimate how far a golf ball will carry under ideal conditions.   Assuming an initial velocity of 50 meters/second using a one iron how much does spin add to the carry distance?   For example, 30 yards compared to no spin or excessiive spin.

   Also can you recommend a web site on this topic.

   Here is the information you seek.

   Science And Golf II by A.J. Cochran and M.R. Farrally

   Contact forces, coefficient of restitution, and spin rate of golf ball impact
   by: P.C. Chou, D. Liang, J. Yang
   Drexel University, Philadelphia, U.S.A.

   W. Gobush
   Titleist and Foot-Joy Worldwide, New Bedford, USA

   Jack

   ---

   From Mark:

   I use LPG and my wife uses a conventional swing with very lightweight ladies' flex graphite irons.   On a recent golf trip, she used borrowed men's R flex irons with steel shafts and shot her best round ever.   She's 5' 3" and swings around 50 mph.   Other than luck, is there any scientific explanation for her feeling more comfortable with heavier, longer shafts?

   I would have to see her swing with both her clubs and the men's clubs to give you a scientifically correct answer.   However, here are a few theories based on science.

   If she is only swinging at 50 mph, she is doing something mechanically incorrect to actually slow down her arms and her clubhead speed through impact.   I have never seen anyone under 70 mph.   This can be a connected body rotation swing.   A body rotation connected stroke produces the lowest clubhead speed.   Clubhead speed would be up to 20 mph greater if she just used her arms like a baseball swing.   The heavier club could have forced her to relax her arms and let them move freely away from the body.   This would have produced more clubhead speed.

   With her lighter clubs she probably has a jerk backstroke and jerk start of the downstroke.   The jerk in the backstroke usually causes a jerk at the start of the downstroke.   When you make a jerking motion at the start of the downstroke, it reduces clubhead speed.   The heavier club forced her to make a smooth transition and allowed the arms enough time to create clubhead speed.

   Jack

   ---

   From Mike:

   I know you have had this question a 1000 times.  This is about clubs being the same length.  I know you said it was tried before by I think Tommy Armour.  There is a fellow that has been working on this system for many years and has figured it out and now produces the clubs.  Here is the address www.1irongolf.com.  If you have some time take a look at it and read about how he achieved this and let us know what you think about his system compared to when Tommy Armour tried it.

   The one length club must fail because it has only one effective clubhead speed.   This speed can never be equal to even traditional assembly, much less scientific assembly.   When you have only one speed and that speed is NEVER maximum, and you can only get different distances due to loft.   Loft will only produce around 7 to 8 yards per club.   Traditional assembly provides about 10 yards per club.   Kuykendall's scientific assembly allows close to 13 yards per club.   What this means is the one club separation between 10 irons will be a maximum of around 80 yards (60 degree wedge going 90 yards to a 3 iron going 170 yards).   Traditional will be 90 yards for the 60 degree wedge to 190 yards with a three iron.   Kuykendall's scientific assembly will be 90 yards with a 60 degree wedge to 220 yards with the 3 iron.   With scientific assembly you have the same feel and swing with each club without the loss of 50 yards of distance.

   Jack

   ---

   From Tim:

   I use a Cobra offset driver that cures my previous slice.   I now hook the ball with my 3 thru 6 irons.   I hit Tommy Armour 845u irons.  Doesn't the offset on the irons help contribute and make the hook worse?

   Every golfer has to make a decision about how he/she plans to play the game.   You have two choices.   The first choice is to choose correct mechanics and equipment that is designed for the system.   This allows golfers to play to their potential for their entire golfing life.

   The second method is to develop your personal version of golf mechanics by the TIPS methods of the golfing industry.   Approximately 90% of golfers choose this method and develop slice mechanics.  Manufacturers have learned that it is useless for them to sell you golf clubs designed for a player with correct mechanics.   They call their clubs, designed to allow some offset for a slice, GAME IMPROVEMENT clubs.   If you purchase a game improvement club, it means help a slice swing hit a ball straighter.   There is no way to design a club that exactly offsets the amount of slice of each individual golfer.   It will always be a partial correction.  The problem with slice mechanics it that it hooks short irons and gradually slices more and more as you move through higher irons and woods.

   The answer to the question above, is, yes.  Once you have a club that corrects for a swing fault, the rest of your clubs will produce an opposite fault that is amplified -- correct one and make 12 others worse.

   This is why the Taylor Made with screws is the worse thing that an amateur can purchase.

   Unfortunately, there is only one solution.   You must make the decision to develop optimum and simple mechanics with clubs designed for the system.   The time frame to become an effective golfer will be around six months.   The time frame to build a swing that will never fail you is two years.   The good news is that you must become your own teacher.   You must use training aids that force you swing correctly.   You have to follow specific drills a minimum of twice a week for two years.   After two years of performing correct mechanics, the movements are stored in Long Term Memory and they are yours for life.

   Jack Kuykendall
   Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

   ---

   From John:

   I am having tremendous success playing my Driver and Woods on the right side of my body as you suggest with the Irons.  I now essentially play all clubs where the clubhead naturally lies with the hands body centered.  This leaves the Driver just right of center.   It is easier for me, for whatever reason, to swing along an appropriate path with this setup.   Is there any reason this would be inappropriate?

   Every golfer starts out with suggested ball positions.   As you become a better and better ball striker, small adjustment will be made.   After you know your mechanics are correct, fine tuning of ball position should be implemented.   For you, it seems, that playing all balls farther back in your stance is allowing you to be the most consistent.   This is correct for you and there is no reason for it to be inappropriate.

   Jack Kuykendall
   Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

   ---

   From Dan:

   In the last Ask Jack (below) you commented on the year that was.  Congratulations on your success!

   What are ypur plans for this year?

   Thank you!

   This year we'll expand on our accomplishments two ways.  One is to expand advertising, and the other is to put one player on tour.

   Jack

   ---

   From Kevin:

   Hi Jack,

   Happy New year!

   Do you have any 2004 year end summary of thoughts of your golfing and LPG discoveries, science, and teaching?

   Yes I do!   2004 was the biggest year in every way for LPG golf.

   • Financially we had the biggest year in the company's history.
   • Teaching golfers to become their own teachers is finally becoming accepted.  Golfers who make the commitment to LPG and follow my instructions always succeed.
   • Frustrated golfers:
        O Are really learning that the quick fix TIPS of the golf magazines always fail.
        O Are really learning that the "sham and charlatan" teachers like A.J. Bonner, Dr. Michael   O'Leary, Dalton McCrary and the Golf Channel instructors always fail.
        O Are really learning that the Butch Harmon's, David Leadbetter's and teachers, who have been proclaimed by the golf magazines as the best in the world, are no better than their local professionals – THEY ALL FAIL.

   The single biggest hurdle that every golfer has to accept is the time frame to change a brain pattern.   Only when you acquire the knowledge on my web site and commit to its requirements, will you ever make an effective change.   Once you follow the instructions, you will possess simple mechanics with more distance and accuracy than you ever dreamed could exist.

   There are three steps to reaching your golfing potential. They are:

   • Knowledge

        O  This is obtained by becoming a member of my web site.   Once you spend some time learning, you will discover that golfing mechanics are laughably simple.   Changing your brain patterns are NOT!

   • Correctly designed training aids

        O You must become your own teacher!   No instructor will ever assist your brain into establishing new patterns.   Only correct repetitions performed by training aids that force you to swing correctly can ever produce an effective change in your golf stroke.

   • Support

        O You must have access to support when you have questions.   It takes time for your brain to understand.  Your brain hates change and it is always trying to correlate new information to the patterns it has already established.  Even when you think you understand, you do not.  It takes several years for brain patterns to equal reality.

   The journey to golfing excellence is very interesting and enlightening.  Conquering a task that seemed so elusive is extremely gratifying.

   Jack
   Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

   ---

   From Lief:

   Dear Don,

   Why doesn't Jack update his page on the Scigolf website?

   Anything wrong - or does he just need new questions?

   Dear Lief,

   Nothing is wrong.   We need new questions.   Send some in  --   please!

   Best regards,

   Don

   ---

   From Ron:

   I have become, recently, curious as to whether Moe would have the capabilities to read a book.   Can you get me any information on this subject?  Some say he had frontal lobe damage, which would make reasoning very difficult, and reading a book near impossible.  Others say he had autism, which is what I think he had.  His teachers in Canada seem to say he probably wouldn't have the ability to comprehend a book.   Perhaps, a magazine article?   I am not arguing either position, but I am curious.

   Moe read newspapers every day.   He was a great card player.   He only had a problem with words when they were spoken very rapidly.   He had no problems when they were slow and he had time to analyze them.   He always had several golf books in his car that he studied.

   Jack
   Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

   ---

   From Steve:

   Hi Jack,

   My question -- When putting a 30 foot putt do you start with the putter right behind the ball or do you start 8 inches behind the ball?

   Your system (LP) does work!

   I start all putts with the putter about 6 to 8" behind the ball.  For the 3 foot and in putts, I take no backstroke to about a 1/2" backstroke.   For longer putts you need a bigger backstroke.   For a 30 foot putt, I take around an 8 to 10" backstroke (16 to 18" total from the ball).

   Jack
   Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

   ---

   From Roderick:

   1) With your LPG system do you have a method of varying trajectories or shot shapes?

   Every system has a method of varying trajectory and shot shape.   Shape is path to face.   Trajectory is release method through impact.   This physics is the same for any system.

   If so, does that instruction come with the Training System?

   I have not included it to date.   I may put it on the web site sometime in the future.

   2) Do you use different flexes in your clubs or "one flex fits all"?

   Every good club maker uses different flexes for the swing speed of the player.   Again, this is straight forward physics.

   3) You state your clubs have the "lowest center of gravity."   Doesn't that make the ball balloon, or is the lower trajectory I prefer not advantageous?   (I am just curious as to how extreme low CG is affected by wind.)

   Trajectory is controlled by stiffness of the shaft.   If you want a low trajectory, just make the shaft stiffer.   The low center of gravity guarantees you that you will not have many thin hits called worm burners.

   4) Thanks for the website, you have me curious as can be. I have switched to NG recently and have hit enough good shots to be encouraged.

   It would have to be in-spite-of any thing Natural Golf teaches.   They are an ABSOLUTE DISGRACE to my discoveries and teaching.

   I have altered my Hogan Apex irons by adding 1" to the length, adjusting the lies and installing oversized grips.

   That is a good start.   I hope you did not install the USGA nonconforming grips of Natural Golf.   They are too small in the left hand and flare out in your right hand.   Just the opposite of what you want.

   5) I am going to go see if I can make any headway with the LPG swing I downloaded off the Scigolf page under Training Aids.   Is this a waste of time w/o the Training Aid?

   Thanks for your continuing contribution to golf.

   Yes.   That is why I allow Scigolf to show the swing.   You will immediately see the merits of greater clubhead speed and maybe more accuracy.   Any time you bend your left arm, you create greater clubhead speed.   However, to learn the motion correctly and become your own teacher, you need the LPG kit and Sponges.  The LPG device has been called by one user, the "Device From Hell." It force you to swing correctly.   Your body does not want to do that.   It wants to do whatever traditional non-optimum mechanics you have learned.   The LPG and Sponges force you to swing correctly with instant feedback on every shot.   With the aids, you can establish successful mechanical patterns in as little as thirty days.   Without the aids, you will just keep doing what you have always done.

   Jack Kuykendall
   Golf's #1 Scientific Teacher

   ---

   From Don:

   LPG works.   Drives are straighter hitting all fairways from the tee in today's round.  Although ball flight is higher with every club, you still get more distance and hit it straigher.   No more flat swing, no more shanks.   No more wrists involved, no more funny business with ugly shots.   On the downswing, separating arms from the shoulders and making good extension (while slowing down the shoulders) preclude over the top swings.  Change resulted in cutting 15 shots average per round, making change only two weeks ago.   Opponents compliment me on the results as well as my slower swing compared to the old so called conventional flat and quick wristy swing.   My back also feels better.   Golf is fun again.   Driving range is now only for warm ups, as tempo and timing are automatic with LPG.

   Congratulations on this scientific discovery.  Feel free to publish this note..

   Don C.

   ---

   The Passing of Moe Norman

   Personal:

   The passing of Moe Norman will leave a void in my heart that cannot be replaced.   The times I spent with Moe were treasured times.   I realized immediately that I was in the presence of an individual who overcame diversity after diversity to become one of the best in the world in his trade.   Through all the diversities, Moe lived a lifestyle that brought him happiness.  I have met few men in my life who were so content with who they were and what they had achieved.

   Moe, although I miss you now, keep up the practice.   I look forward to seeing you again on the first tee.

   Boyfriends:

   Moe was a unique person when it came to the men he trusted.  He treated them like a person treats their best friends when they are in their pre-adult years.   Moe always referred to the people he trusted as his "boyfriends."  There were numerous times when someone would approach Moe (who he trusted), and he would say, "Ah, my boyfriend."  I am proud to have been one of Moe's "boyfriends."

   Gravy:

   During the lunch break of a clinic at the Greenleafe Resort in Florida, Moe was not eating his lunch.   When I asked him why, he said, "I can't eat bread without gravy."  I went to the kitchen and asked if there was anyway they could make some gravy.   The answer was no.  So, Moe and I hit the road to find a restaurant that served gravy.   We stopped at four restaurants before finding a family-type restaurant that served gravy.   Moe had roast beef and gravy on his toast.   He was very happy and enjoyed his lunch.

   The Making of the Fireside Chat:

   Moe told me during one of our first meetings that he would like to tell the golfing public about all the knowledge he had gained during his life in golf.   I listened to hundreds of stories during the first three years.   The Fireside Chat video was my chance to let Moe preserve his thoughts for all future generations.   As I knew what he wanted to say, all I had to do was just feed him the questions and let him respond.   This is a must see for Moe Norman fans.

   Moe Versus God:

   There is no doubt in my mind that Moe is now standing on the first tee and saying to God, "OK big boy, let's get it on."

   Jack

   ---

   From Dave:

   You advise hitting irons off the right breast and woods off the left breast.  I suppose that you mean woods from a tee.  What about fairway woods?

   Irons -   From Right breast to middle of stance
   Fairway woods -   Middle of stance
   Driver (Teed) -   Left breast to several inches forward.

   Jack

   ---

   From Kevin:

   Is another advantage of the bent lead arm and non-bent lead wrist, also that the golfer is able to maintain the palm grip in the power hand?

   NO!   The grip remains in the palm of the right hand throughout the swing in LPG and all correct Single-Axis teaching!

   It seems clear that even Moe and other SA golfers with straight lead arm that the palm grip must shift at the top, (unless in a very very short swing/shot), try it.

   It is absolutely not clear!  This nonsense comes from amateurs seeing what they want to see on the Single-Axis forum.

   Moe Norman kept the club in the palm of his right hand during the entire swing.   The angles shown on the Single-Axis site absolutely show that the grip is in his palm.  They are making an incorrect interpretation of the image.

   This is not talked about anywhere.

   Because it is not necessary to talk about something that does not happen.

   In 1995 golf Digest Moe has palm grip at set up at address and a finger grip at the top.

   Moe ABSOLUTELY DID NOT have the grip in his fingers of this right hand at the top.  This is an incorrect observation of the image by anyone who sees the grip in the fingers of Moe's right hand.

   You told me (years ago) that you did not ask Moe to bend is lead arm because he was too old at this time to make the change.   Yet you had him change to a split grip.

   The split grip was an easy change for Moe.   The hands function exactly the same except now he had more control and clubhead speed.

   I did not invent LPG and the bending of the left arm until August of 1997.   By that time, I was no longer corresponding with Moe.   I could not watch his destruction by the despicable Natural Golf management.

   Why not finish with arms bent?

   When the arms are waist high in the follow-through, the swing is over.   Finish any way you are comfortable.

   Jack

   ---

   From Don:

   Hi Jack,

   I have been asked about the grip Moe used, and I've responded that I didn't know, but I'd ask you.

   At the first clinic of yours that I attended you said, if my memory is accurate, that you were giving a CEU seminar for PGA members and Mark Evershed commented that the swing you were demonstrating reminded him of Moe's swing.   You said, "Moe who?"

   Not quite.   I met Mark Evershed in a hotel in California at the request of an AMWAY diamond.   I went throught the science of the swing and that is when Mark said, "You are talking about Moe Norman."   I responded with, "What's a Moe Norman?"

   Later on   (JK: almost two years)  you met with Moe, I think along with Scott Hazledine and Craig Tarbeck, watched his swing and explained to him what he was doing.   Moe said you were the first one who ever understood his swing and Scott told me you saw things in his swing that no one else had ever seen.   Moe gave you the film of his swing and told you to use it to help others.   Am I right so far?

   That is correct.

   Was Moe using a palm grip then or did he change later when you signed him on with NG?

   No.   He was using an overlapping grip.   When I showed him the advantage of the split hand grip, he changed immediately.

   Jack

   ---

   From Jack:

   I am a 8 handicap and hit a Taylor Made 580 driver.  I have been losing a lot of distance due to hitting it too high.  At the golf store, one of the salesman said to put lead tape on the top of the driver from center to head.

   Will this work or should I be doing something else (ball back in the stance, tee lower)?

   Mr. Richards,

   The last thing you need is another TIP.  Send me a video of your swing and I can give you an answer.

   Jack Kuykendall

   ---

   From Jack:

   I took a lesson from Keith Behrens about 6 weeks ago.   I had been using your system for about 3 months and felt that I needed a lesson to help me better understand the swing.  Keith is great guy and very patient teacher.  I spent about an hour with him.  He helped me greatly, especially with my grip and stance.

   Since then I have played some pretty good golf.  I had a stroke 2 years which affected my right side and my handicap went up to an 18 from a 10.  I have recently shot an 88, 87, 86 and an 82.  My putting prevented me from breaking 80 a few times!

   This past Sunday I won our club's tournament for the Northern California Golf Associate Club Net Amateur.  I have to play a in another qualifier and then it's on to Poppy Ridge!  There were many times over past 2 years when I felt I would never break 90 again.  I have a way to go, but I feel that I'm the right track.  I have been doing the zone diet for about 4 months and have joined a gym to increase my strength.  Your system and Keith help have helped me realize my dream.

   I'm delighted to hear of your success!

   Jack

   ---

   From Robert:

   Moe was hitting sandshots.

   Jesper Parnevik and another golfer watched Moe hit them.

   The other guy left since Moe clearly wasn’t hitting them close to the pin at all.

   Jesper who is a curious guy watched a bit longer until a pattern was displayed on the green.  Moe wasn’t hitting the balls to the hole, he was writing his name (Moe) on the green with golf balls from the bunker.

   Got the story from a fellow golfer in Sweden Hans Andersson Kungsbacka.

   I have not heard that one, so I can't comment.

   Jack

   ---

   Go to previous questions:
   

   #12

   #11

   #10

   #9

   #8

   #7

   #6

   <