Swing like Hogan

[stefanovic]

With my golf game in decline, one question I've always wanted to ask is just how do you swing the club like Ben Hogan?
I read the Modern Fundamentals and Power Golf by the great man. They were contradictory. Then I read he had a secret which he sold to a magazine which was not revealed in the books.
Finally I read where it appeared he could not do it himself.
I'll promise to give it a try.

 

[Doh]

This has been debated by many people over the years some of them claiming they have found the secret. However I firmly believe that Hogan just found a way of swinging that just suited him as did Mo Norman.

 

[Crow]

Hogan's technique (or secret if you prefer) is in his fundamentals book.

What he and Moe Norman did that most readers of his book don't do is put in the practice.
That's long, hard, dedicated practice, not a few sessions down the range and "oh, this isn't working, there must be some secret they're not telling me".

 

[Dibby]

This one is easy! You travel back in time, and conspire to have Hogans parents have you as their son instead of him.

Ok, so the above is facetious, but the point is you should swing it in the way that is best for you. Look at all the top level players out there, there is no textbook swing or secret. If you're 5'8, 66kg and have exactly the same proportions, strengths, weaknesses, advantages and limitations as Hogan, maybe by happy coincidence that is the best way, if not don't try and force it.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Well as a young teen I was given the book by a neighbour - it had been her son's and he had left home.

At the side of our back garden we had a garage - and in the garden side of the garage were a glazed door and a large window. I put the book on the ground open at whatever I wanted to 'learn' and looking in the door and window (for side and face on) I matched position of my hands, arms, hips and and legs to the pictures - liking especially a couple of stance pictures and a swing sequence. I would do this for quite a while each time. And then went to the private school playing field across the road from us (it was always empty) and hit golf balls (I only had two or three and so didn't get to many reps in ). Then at weekends and holidays went to the local muni with my mates and played.

But always back to the book and the window of the garage.

I'm thinking not an ideal way to learn a swing - but 15yrs later one day out playing with a bloke I didn't know - he turned to me and said 'Though we haven't played before I have been thinking I know you - and I've just realised why - you swing it like Hogan )

it worked great for a long time - for as long as I was playing a lot - then when I wasn't it stopped working.

I still love flicking through the book.

 

[patricks148]

you might be better off trying to replicate Paul Hogans swing instead

 

[stefanovic]

I threw the book away a long tome ago so I'll have to rely on memory.
Listing some of the many problems I encountered:

Hogan stated the backswing starts with the forward press, which nobody has been able to show me. So how do you do the forward press?
I think he said there are 8 movements to master, when most people say you can only focus on 2 or 3 for the 2 seconds of the swing.
I understand he kept the secret of the cupped wrist to himself until Life magazine made a big money offer. Critics said it would ruin your swing.
He insisted the down swing begins with the turning of the left hip. This is where it gets awkward. What precedes needs to be spot on.
He talked about 2 swing planes and an imaginary pane of glass resting on the shoulders.
I can only assume he must have been rehearsing it even in his sleep.
I don't believe any golfer could replicate this today.
I know Trevino took inspiration from Hogan but that was about all.
I also tried to swing like Trevino based on his book Swing My Way. The ball had a habit of shaping like a banana and coming up short to the right.
Then there was Faldo's A Swing for Life. He can't do it either now.
Frankly all I want is to think about one thing in order to square the club face up to the ball to keep the ball in play.

 

[Orikoru]

I think it's pointless trying to learn someone else's swing. You can only swing your own swing and make little changes and improvements to that. I watch a lot of pro golfers swings, and if I see something that might work with mine and improve my swing, then I'll give it a go and see. But I'd never think "I'm going to change my whole swing so it looks like McIlroy, or Woods, or Hogan". I want it to feel natural first and foremost, so I'm not trying to remember countless different swing thoughts and details.

 

[uncle chop chop]

Well as a young teen I was given the book by a neighbour - it had been her son's and he had left home.

At the side of our back garden we had a garage - and in the garden side of the garage were a glazed door and a large window. I put the book on the ground open at whatever I wanted to 'learn' and looking in the door and window (for side and face on) I matched position of my hands, arms, hips and and legs to the pictures - liking especially a couple of stance pictures and a swing sequence. I would do this for quite a while each time. And then went to the private school playing field across the road from us (it was always empty) and hit golf balls (I only had two or three and so didn't get to many reps in ). Then at weekends and holidays went to the local muni with my mates and played.

But always back to the book and the window of the garage.

I'm thinking not an ideal way to learn a swing - but 15yrs later one day out playing with a bloke I didn't know - he turned to me and said 'Though we haven't played before I have been thinking I know you - and I've just realised why - you swing it like Hogan )

it worked great for a long time - for as long as I was playing a lot - then when I wasn't it stopped working.

I still love flicking through the book.

Recently heard Pete Cowan saying that he believed the Koreans were so good nowerdays as they only have 50 yard long driving ranges, with nets at the back.

Their practice is dictated by form rather than ball flight. We seem to quickly abandon a movement or technique if it does yield the instant results.

Sometimes an hour in front of a mirror working in a movement and hitting into a net is better than hitting a load of balls. But there is not alot of enjoyment in that!!

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Recently heard Pete Cowan saying that he believed the Koreans were so good nowerdays as they only have 50 yard long driving ranges, with nets at the back.

Their practice is dictated by form rather than ball flight. We seem to quickly abandon a movement or technique if it does yield the instant results.

Sometimes an hour in front of a mirror working in a movement and hitting into a net is better than hitting a load of balls. But there is not alot of enjoyment in that!!

For me there is not a lot of enjoyment in any form of practice. Back in the day I was learning so that was OK. That said - I do have to practice these days - and as I am effectively having to relearn - it is all about body, harms, legs etc position - and absolutely nothing to do with distance.

 

[Dibby]

Recently heard Pete Cowan saying that he believed the Koreans were so good nowerdays as they only have 50 yard long driving ranges, with nets at the back.

Their practice is dictated by form rather than ball flight. We seem to quickly abandon a movement or technique if it does yield the instant results.

Sometimes an hour in front of a mirror working in a movement and hitting into a net is better than hitting a load of balls. But there is not alot of enjoyment in that!!

I think he is speaking nonsense. The idea of the game is to get the ball in the hole in the least strokes, not have the prettiest swing. If we went with the form over function method, we would never see players like Jim Furyk, or Matthew Wolf - who is one of the longest hitters out there, so must be doing something right.

 

[uncle chop chop]

I think he is speaking nonsense. The idea of the game is to get the ball in the hole in the least strokes, not have the prettiest swing. If we went with the form over function method, we would never see players like Jim Furyk, or Matthew Wolf - who is one of the longest hitters out there, so must be doing something right.

Your correct and this discussion was in relation to your average golfer, the ones who aren't naturals and can't find there own way to effective swing. The average golfer i.e. us would benefit from more time working on form than hitting it straight for one range session to only find it goes everywhere next time on the course.

Average handicaps in Korea are significantly lower than anywhere else in the world.

Say what you want about Matt Wolf and Jim Furyk, no matter how funky their swings, certain fundamental parts of the swing will have very similar characteristics. It's all about delivering a square club face consistently to the ball, at speed. Most amatuers are horrendously bad at this.

 

[Leftie]

However I firmly believe that Hogan just found a way of swinging that just suited him as did Mo Norman.

As a slight diversion, Mo Norman would happily explain his swing - or rather what he thought was his swing. As in a lot of cases before good slomo photography, not all was as it seemed.

 

[Dibby]

Your correct and this discussion was in relation to your average golfer, the ones who aren't naturals and can't find there own way to effective swing. The average golfer i.e. us would benefit from more time working on form than hitting it straight for one range session to only find it goes everywhere next time on the course.

Average handicaps in Korea are significantly lower than anywhere else in the world.

Say what you want about Matt Wolf and Jim Furyk, no matter how funky their swings, certain fundamental parts of the swing will have very similar characteristics. It's all about delivering a square club face consistently to the ball, at speed. Most amatuers are horrendously bad at this.

I'm all for the Jim Furyks and Matt Wolfs of this world, not against them.

I haven't seen the stats on Korean handicaps, do you know where that can be found? I do know participation in Korea is primarily on screens, due to many factors including costs and time for playing golf. I still think if anything this is correlation rather than causation. In human learning, you need feedback, if you remove the feedback of the ball flight you make that learning harder. It's easier to imagine when you picture footballers or rugby players practising without a ball. It's not that you would never do it, it's just not a primary method. If handicaps really are lower in Korea, I would suggest it is more to do with selection bias (who plays golf in Korea, do they continue with it if not good etc..), why they play (how important is score v having fun) and with regards the practice the fact they are willing to persevere with it is more important than the actual working on swing form without a ball.

 

[Orikoru]

I'm all for the Jim Furyks and Matt Wolfs of this world, not against them.

I haven't seen the stats on Korean handicaps, do you know where that can be found? I do know participation in Korea is primarily on screens, due to many factors including costs and time for playing golf. I still think if anything this is correlation rather than causation. In human learning, you need feedback, if you remove the feedback of the ball flight you make that learning harder. It's easier to imagine when you picture footballers or rugby players practising without a ball. It's not that you would never do it, it's just not a primary method. If handicaps really are lower in Korea, I would suggest it is more to do with selection bias (who plays golf in Korea, do they continue with it if not good etc..), why they play (how important is score v having fun) and with regards the practice the fact they are willing to persevere with it is more important than the actual working on swing form without a ball.

I think this as well. If you're hitting into a 50 yard driving range, as said earlier in the thread, you might be hitting drives that start off straight and then fade after 100 yards (we've all seen drives like that). But you would never know so you just keep hitting that drive and ingraining it further, then go out on the course and all your drives are in the trees! The proof is in the pudding for me, no matter what you're doing, if the ball is launching long and straight then you're golden.

 

[uncle chop chop]

I'm all for the Jim Furyks and Matt Wolfs of this world, not against them.

I haven't seen the stats on Korean handicaps, do you know where that can be found? I do know participation in Korea is primarily on screens, due to many factors including costs and time for playing golf. I still think if anything this is correlation rather than causation. In human learning, you need feedback, if you remove the feedback of the ball flight you make that learning harder. It's easier to imagine when you picture footballers or rugby players practising without a ball. It's not that you would never do it, it's just not a primary method. If handicaps really are lower in Korea, I would suggest it is more to do with selection bias (who plays golf in Korea, do they continue with it if not good etc..), why they play (how important is score v having fun) and with regards the practice the fact they are willing to persevere with it is more important than the actual working on swing form without a ball.

Not sure where they can be found, from what I have been told so cant guarantee the 100% accuracy but UK and US are similar 16 ish, Korea the average is single figures.

I'm not saying its gospell, its not my theory just a theory that was discussed by one of the worlds top coaches. I was just raising it as point based on an early comment to the thread about practising movements without a ball, and agreeing there could be benefit to a lot of golfers from practising without a ball getting in the way some of the time.

On your point regards feedback, I would say though that you would only remove the ball flight feedback if that was what they did all the time. Hitting into a restricted distance net isn't their only form of practice or play though is it. The feedback is there at times, on screens and out on the course.

My point wasn't that this is the secret to success is only to hit into a net, far bigger picture than just simplifying it to that but it could be a contributing factor. It was more related to what with what you have said above they persevere with movements more than we would. The theory is that as they aren't worrying about what the ball does as much as getting the movement right when they only see a limited ball flight. Also 50 yards i not as limited ball flight as hitting into a net we have here at the local clubs that give no feedback. It will give them an idea of if they are somewhere near.

When we go to the driving range we don't get it straight away and the ball starts going everywhere we stop. Their feedback is coming from mirrors, slow mo video etc. They will be working key fundamentals like swallowing etc, and wont immediately give up because on the range they suddenly start leaving them all out right.

 

[uncle chop chop]

I think this as well. If you're hitting into a 50 yard driving range, as said earlier in the thread, you might be hitting drives that start off straight and then fade after 100 yards (we've all seen drives like that). But you would never know so you just keep hitting that drive and ingraining it further, then go out on the course and all your drives are in the trees! The proof is in the pudding for me, no matter what you're doing, if the ball is launching long and straight then you're golden.

And how many Amateurs hit it long and straight on the range and are golden until they step onto the course? The majority!

Probably lots of reasons, but one of them could be that it's is because they practice a swing that requires timing due to the complexity of the corrections they are usually naturally making. This is easier when they have had 10 shots to get the timing right but they don't have that luxury on the course.

Practising hitting a ball repeatedly straight on a range can be achieved with the most crooked swing, taking it the course generally cant. Those types of players could potentially be better concentrating a little more on form than ball flight on a range where it means absolutely zip. The opposite could be said for better payers who fundamentally make good movements and actually get more info from their ball flight than any slow mo video or swing analysis.

Like I said above I'm not saying this is gospel but could be food for thought for certain golfers.

 

[SocketRocket]

In any other similar action to hitting a golf ball our brain knows exactly how our body should move to produce the correct delivery of an object to its target. Young kids do it perfectly until someone confuses them by explaining how the wrists, arms, shoulders, torso, hips, knees and feet should move.

 

[bobmac]

In any other similar action to hitting a golf ball our brain knows exactly how our body should move to produce the correct delivery of an object to its target. Young kids do it perfectly until someone confuses them by explaining how the wrists, arms, shoulders, torso, hips, knees and feet should move.

I agree.
The 'engineers' get hold of it and write umpteen books about it eg 'the Golf Machine' and just make it way too complicated.
A bit like teaching a child how to walk from a book.

Simplified...........
You only need to know 2 things in the golf swing..............
How to hit (contact)
Where to hit it (direction)
That's it.
KISS

 

[Crow]

Or as the great John Jacobs called it, two turns and a swish.