Wrist Hinge

[SocketRocket]

I have given this subject a lot of consideration over time and have come to the conclusion that trying to create hinge and lag with the wrists is a major factor to poor ball striking.

This video is very much in line with my thoughts:

[video=youtube;dPb-a7Ez1gs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPb-a7Ez1gs[/video]

What do you think?

 

[JustOne]

That's a complicated video to talk thru. I disagree with about 90% of it but he 'accidentally' shows a couple of things that are really bad, for example the position he's in at 40 seconds where he has a massively cupped left wrist??? so YES that would leave the face open at the top.... but who swings to THAT position he shows???? 99.999997% of all golfers would never swing/hinge to that position (no width and no depth). I agree with gripping it in the fingers, but not the stuff he then says after that. 1 min 50 seconds is a GOOD position, sets the club a little behind the hands when viewed face on but perfectly on plane with the left arm when viewed on the left arm plane.

In my opinion you should hinge the club to 90 in relation to the straight left arm by P3.

 

[Foxholer]

I believe trying to create lag is counter-productive!

Lag is built in (or at least should be) by the natural wrist-cock on the back-swing - as he states - and any manipulation requires some sort of compensatory action. I don't believe it matters where the (nearly) 90* angle is created, as long as it feels natural and is created. P3 seems a too early, so manipulative, to me.

The key is to not lose lag before impact! The pump-drill can instill the feeling that is required, but likewise, I believe trying to falsely maintain lag is counter-productive.

 

[JustOne]

The first one shown here is the one I would recommend, apart from he shows too much left arm rotation so the club lays down behind him a bit too much after saying it'll hit him in the head (which it won't because the shoulders are supposed to be turning).... the other ones are OK for 'fixing things' if someone can't swing properly (physically restricted in some way).

[video=youtube;2RERAtu8Cwk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RERAtu8Cwk[/video]

 

[JustOne]

P3 seems a too early, so manipulative, to me.

Manipulative???

Here's Ernie Els.... 'The Big Easy' at P3,... couldn't be more perfect.

AND it's with a fairway wood

 

[Foxholer]

Manipulative???

Here's Ernie Els.... 'The Big Easy' at P3,... couldn't be more perfect.

AND it's with a fairway wood

Els actually sets his wrists very early!

Check quite a bit earlier in the vid and he's got the club set at 90* only just past P2!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyM_QrMQQpM

So it's really a case of where the wrists are set, rather than having it done at a particular point.

Luke Donald is almost precisely P3, McIlroy before, Fowler, Simpson and Stricker (particularly) later.

Getting that angle and not losing it until late is the key though!

 

[sev112]

Guys, JO, Foxy
Not being argumentative , just interested
Why is a wrist cock, and in particular a 90 deg one, NECESSARY (as opposed to say beneficial) ?

Looking at many many average golfers, I conclude that poor wrist cock, and more importantly poor uncocking is the cause of many many poor shots. Suggesting the possibility that not deliberately cocking on the backswing would improve consistency.
(I accept that some degree of natural cock will happen at the top of the backswing)

 

[HawkeyeMS]

Guys, JO, Foxy
Not being argumentative , just interested
Why is a wrist cock, and in particular a 90 deg one, NECESSARY (as opposed to say beneficial) ?

Looking at many many average golfers, I conclude that poor wrist cock, and more importantly poor uncocking is the cause of many many poor shots. Suggesting the possibility that not deliberately cocking on the backswing would improve consistency.
(I accept that some degree of natural cock will happen at the top of the backswing)

I agree with this, I have very little wrist hinge, if I "try" to get more, my game goes down hill. I certainly don't think more wrist hinge would make me a better player

 

[Foxholer]

Guys, JO, Foxy
Not being argumentative , just interested
Why is a wrist cock, and in particular a 90 deg one, NECESSARY (as opposed to say beneficial) ?

Looking at many many average golfers, I conclude that poor wrist cock, and more importantly poor uncocking is the cause of many many poor shots. Suggesting the possibility that not deliberately cocking on the backswing would improve consistency.
(I accept that some degree of natural cock will happen at the top of the backswing)

I agree with this, I have very little wrist hinge, if I "try" to get more, my game goes down hill. I certainly don't think more wrist hinge would make me a better player

If the wrists don't hinge/cock/set to that 90* angle, then you've thrown away a potential source of power (actually specified as Power Accumulator # 2). That angle becomes (virtually) the maximum lag, so anything less than 90* is the equivalent of starting the downswing with a cast!

Here's a link that might help. http://perfectgolfswingreview.net/backswing.htm

And JO right (well probably more right than me) on the point where the angle is 90*. While it's not imperative, 90* at P3 is reasonably standard. It doesn't feel as if that happens though, but the wrist cock moves the club-head through a huge arc very quickly - just as un-cocking it does on the downswing.

Hawkeye. I bet you do get 'sufficient' wrist hinge. It's probably just not something you think about - and doesn't seem something you should think about either! As long as you are not unacceptably losing distance because of it, it's merely a trait of your swing. You probably have a better shoulder turn than most.

 

[sev112]

If the wrists don't hinge/cock/set to that 90* angle, then you've thrown away a potential source of power (actually specified as Power Accumulator # 2).

Yes, hence my question, is it necessary. I'd suggest that amateur golfers can get sufficient power from hip turn, shoulder turn, arm lift and mostly from shaft unloading, and that by taking DELIBERATE wrist cock out of the swing they get much greater constancy of strike and initial direction ?

I deliberately try to not cock my wrist (with the exception of my Pelz-influenced short game shots, and also where I need the power because those backswings don't load the shaft enough to get sufficient power).
My main swing attempts to load the shaft on backswing and keep the club face on line for as long as possible in backswing and downswing. This is all about taking as many variable out as possible
A little unique I know

 

[Foxholer]

Yes, hence my question, is it necessary. I'd suggest that amateur golfers can get sufficient power from hip turn, shoulder turn, arm lift and mostly from shaft unloading, and that by taking DELIBERATE wrist cock out of the swing they get much greater constancy of strike and initial direction ?

I deliberately try to not cock my wrist (with the exception of my Pelz-influenced short game shots, and also where I need the power because those backswings don't load the shaft enough to get sufficient power).
My main swing attempts to load the shaft on backswing and keep the club face on line for as long as possible in backswing and downswing. This is all about taking as many variable out as possible
A little unique I know

I think you are acting under a huge misconception!

No (well, not much) problem with the idea of keeping the club-face 'square' (SocketRocket's approach, I believe, and certainly that of many teachers) but that doesn't preclude wrist-cock. It's just that that has to be done (and undone) properly and allowed for when identifying whether face is square or not.

If your 'main' swing doesn't have wrist-cock, then it will look those of 9-year olds swinging full length clubs and beginner ladies!
I don't believe your main swing is really all that much different from your Pelz one - except a bit longer (11 to 12 as opposed to 9 or 10:30 and full rather than his 'finesse' finish). Video it and I'm certain it will show what I mean.

And I 100% disagree about 'loading the shaft on the backswing' (as I understand that term)! Please explain what you mean by that phrase and how 'loading the shaft' happens! Loading the body (TGM's Power Accumulators), certainly. 'Loading' the shaft, as I understand it, only happens from the transition stage

 

[JustOne]

Steve Stricker is super-wide...... two of his swing sequences here.... in the left pics notice just how far to the right his hands are, not many people get THAT wide, as a result his shoulders turn more flat and his P3 position is HIGHER so he has more time to hinge the club - at a slower rate, sometimes he's shy of 90 degrees by P3 but by P3.5 he always seems to be fully hinged to 90 degrees.

Sev - people with less wrist cock tend to overswing because they still 'need' to get the club up over their shoulder, they often reverse pivot a litte at the top and collapse their left arm, even then the one's who still manage a reasonable downswing CAN'T HANDLE the 'downward cock' of the wrists required to get to impact, certainly not reliably.

I'll see if I can knock up an example in a bit of WHY you need some hinge...................... :thup:

 

[SocketRocket]

The point was not that you should have no wrist hinge, only that the amount naturally set at address is enough already. The wrists can only add something in the region of an addditional 10 degrees to the setup position and how much extra power will that create? To me its just an added manipulation that must be made to return the clubface to the ball.

IMO Lag is nothing to do with added wrist hinge, its more about retaining the angle at setup and not casting it on the way down.

Pictures of golfers hinge with a driver is a bit misleading. Due to the length of the club it has a tendency to pull the wrists down at the top which creates slightly more of an angle, irons will do this less, especially as they get shorter.

 

[JustOne]

IMO Lag is nothing to do with added wrist hinge, its more about retaining the angle at setup and not casting it on the way down.

100% agree.

Lag and wrist hinge are often confused.

If you add extra wrist hinge (more than 90) you invariably have to dump (lose) it again.

If you retain what you have at impact you're doing OK... however that doesn't allow for a good impact position so you DO have to add a bit more than at address, but not more than 90 (many pros go past 90 by the way)..... and that's what I am about to try to explain for Sev112, but got to make some pics first...... :thup:

The wrists can only add something in the region of an addditional 10 degrees to the setup position and how much extra power will that create?

The wrists can add 45 degrees or more depending on shaft angle at address, not 10 degrees, and now you're getting into LAG and not actually the wrist hinge angle.

 

[Foxholer]

The point was not that you should have no wrist hinge, only that the amount naturally set at address is enough already. The wrists can only add something in the region of an addditional 10 degrees to the setup position and how much extra power will that create? To me its just an added manipulation that must be made to return the clubface to the ball.

IMO Lag is nothing to do with added wrist hinge, its more about retaining the angle at setup and not casting it on the way down.

You'd need to explain how it's only 10*. I believe the the wrist-cock equates to the difference between P2 angle and 90* - more like 30+.

Would you really want the P5 position (halfway down) to look the same as P2?!

 

[JustOne]

SEV part 1

Here's a pole, it's in two pieces and hinged in the middle, add a weight to it and it will bend, when it bends it now has MORE HINGE than when it started.

Now that it's bent it's actually SHORTER too!!

with me so far?

 

[JustOne]

SEV part 2

Here's that same principle applied to the golf swing, the imaginary weight is applied to the right shoulder so the 'pole' bends, has more hinge, and is shorter...

This is LAG, the hands are forwards and the right shoulder is lower. There is more hinge than there was at address.

If the right shoulder DOESN'T come down than you won't have as much lag. You can hit the ball with the right shoulder higher.. but you won't have that lag/hinge angle.

 

[SocketRocket]

You'd need to explain how it's only 10*. I believe the the wrist-cock equates to the difference between P2 angle and 90* - more like 30+.

Would you really want the P5 position (halfway down) to look the same as P2?!

Hold your left arm out in front of yourself with your hand flat and palm facing right. Now hinge your left wrist upwards while keeping a the wrist flat in line with your arm. How far can you move it without cupping?

 

[SocketRocket]

SEV part 2

Here's that same principle applied to the golf swing, the imaginary weight is applied to the right shoulder so the 'pole' bends, has more hinge, and is shorter...

This is LAG, the hands are forwards and the right shoulder is lower. There is more hinge than there was at address.

If the right shoulder DOESN'T come down than you won't have as much lag. You can hit the ball with the right shoulder higher.. but you won't have that lag/hinge angle.

I take it your picture is face on to a golfer. I consider wrist hinge to be the up and down movement of the wrist. I think you are considering the wrists folding. (moving in a swatting action) . In your example what arm is it representing as we hold a golf club with two arms, at impact I like to see the left arm in line with the golf shaft. I take it is the right arm in the picture. Not trying to be difficult here I am just a bit confused at the image.

 

[Foxholer]

Hold your left arm out in front of yourself with your hand flat and palm facing right. Now hinge your left wrist upwards while keeping a the wrist flat in line with your arm. How far can you move it without cupping?

Why not actually use a golf club at address position (though the left wrist is cupped there). The answer is about 50*.

And left hand out with thumb horizontal (as in how it is when on the golf club), I can hinge it about a bit more than 30*!

But answer my previous question. Do you want P5 to equal P2? I certainly don't!