One of the reflex swing basics, but one which Blake never stated explicitly, is bent-over posture. Blake employed and Richard Wax still employs well bent-over posture in their respective swings. It is clearly depicted in the drawings of both books and you can see it in Richard's swing in the Blake DVD. After much experimentation over many years, I feel certain that this bent-over posture is critical to the connection between the legs and the upper body. You can try it for yourself by setting up well bent over, then gradually altering your address to more upright posture. At some point I believe you will find that you lose your lower-upper body connection and that you can no longer drag the club down with your legs. No matter how much you bend over, you must take care not to allow your pelvis to move back, ie, rear sticking out. Do you think a bent-over posture at address is essential to the lower-upper body connection? SD

I think that the bent over posture permits the right elbow to be positioned well away from the body throughout the swing. In the conventional swing the body gets in the way and has to be "cleared". If the body (hips) are not cleared the golfer runs the risk of getting "stuck". Even so, in the conventional swing the right elbow barely makes it past the body as in Hogan's seemingly hip hugging elbow position.

In the Reflex Swing there is little fear of getting stuck because the right elbow never gets pulled behind the body during the backswing in the firt place. In Mindy's swing the arms are moved out in front of the body throughout the swing, a feature which we hear a lot about these days among Tour players and Tour swing gurus. I think that Mindy's bent over posture helps a lot to keep the right elbow unstuck.

Also, IMO, if the right elbow is kept well away from the body by a bent over posture, then there is no need for a fast hip lash to clear the body in the downswing. And without a fast hip lash the swing might very well feel as though one was turning to talk to someone at table. But that doesn't mean that the legs are supplying the power. It only means that no effort is needed to move the hips out of the way of the right elbow.

Tom

Blake adopted an open stance in the mid-1970s and incorporated it into his swing description in GTTB. He specifically wrote of how the open stance, which turns the hips to about square in the backswing, made clearing of the hips simpler.

About the open stance, Blake wrote:

"Sam Snead repeatedly made the point that golf is a very much easier game if a method is found of getting the left side out of the way; and the general trend in golf, particularly in the short game, has been towards a more open stance. It was a combination of years of brainwashing and a natural inclination not to be too non-conformist that prevented me from pursuing this trend to its logical conclusion. As soon as I decided to take the plunge, however, a whole lot of things slipped into place. It became clear that I had been groping towards the stone-skimmer's shoulder turn, which I described at the beginning of this chapter and which is entirely different from the shoulder turn in either the old Scottish swing or the square-to-square swing and is a completely athletic movement which anyone can perform. I realised that, in some respects, I had been making life unnecessarily complicated, and an open position of the feet made for a swing which, while founded on the principles I put forward in "The Golf Swing of the Future," was very much simpler and very much easier to perform."

Blake's words show that he was still quite certain that his legs were providing his swing power, but I think what you are saying is that he was actually just making a conventional swing, powered by the upper body, easier to perform. Jim
Jim

Because Mindy doesn't have to rapidly clear his hips he can maintain a steady base of operations (the legs) to support his upper body motion. In the more conventional swing the player has to "fire" his hips to clear them and he must still try to keep his balance while doing so. I think that's a trickier move than Mindy's swing suggests. Also, as one gets older one may not possess sufficient flexibility to "fire" the hips. Then what happens? - I think then we must either reroute the club on the downswing "out and around" ourselves, hitting a pull or pull slice, or else we must swing back on the outside and come down across the ball, hitting some kind of intentional cut or fade.

Tom

One must wonder why more pros don't adopt an open stance. Why attempt a difficult hip 'lash' (for clearing hips) when simply opening the hips a bit at address eliminates the issue? Yet we don't see many pros with an open stance. I think of Lee Trevino (now basically retired) and Paul Azinger (not playing much). From days of yore: Blake wrote that most golfers used an open stance before Harry Vardon came along. According to Mindy, J.H. Taylor, who was 45 degrees open at address, was recognized as greatest golfer of all time, but Vardon tied him in the 1896 British Open and beat Taylor in the playoff. Golfers began to follow the lead of Vardon in his 'unconventional' square stance. Mindy saw this as a wrong path taken by mainstream golf. Of course, golfers also adopted the 'Vardon grip.'

You wrote (earlier): "In Mindy's swing the arms are moved out in front of the body throughout the swing, a feature which we hear a lot about these days among Tour players and Tour swing gurus." Who are the Tour players and swing gurus who are now advocating keeping arms out in front of the body throughout the swing? Of course, Blake had his own reasons for keeping the arms in front of the body. He thought the 'connection' between lower and upper body was lost if the the club was backswung well inside and around behind the body. Jim

I think that the modern ball has a lot to do with this trend. The modern ball doesn't hook or slice nearly as much as the old wound balata ball used to. The traditional sweeping draw and push draw are obsolete shot patterns these days. To try to come from the inside on the downswing will likely result in a shot that sends the ball dead right.

Today, most players try to do what Mindy did - they keep the ball above the fairway for the full extent of its flight. Thus, it is helpful to keep the club relatively more in front of the body on the way back and down. I think all of the modern instructors teach this (but maybe not Stack & Tilt? - I don't know much about that technique).

Tom

You wrote: "Today, most players try to do what Mindy did - they keep the ball above the fairway for the full extent of its flight. Thus, it is helpful to keep the club relatively more in front of the body on the way back and down." Your words imply that keeping the ball more in front of oneself delivers a more purely square impact, ie, ball flight would be straighter right from the git-go. Is this because there is less opening and closing of clubface for this kind of swing? Do you think this reveals why Blake was an unusually straight hitter? Of course, he was doing his hitting during the old wound ball days when most players thought 'working the ball' was essential.

Re open stance: Do you think an open stance is a useful trait in the golf swing? Is anything lost with an open stance? Blake apparently thought its value to be: (1) simplifies clearing the hips in downswing, and (2) allows the 'stone skimmer's shoulder turn', ie, shoulders continue to turn after hips have stopped turning in backswing. Jim

I wish I knew what part of Mindy's method permitted him to hit the ball so straight, but I have no idea.

JIM ASKED: Your words imply that keeping the ball <club?> more in front of oneself delivers a more purely square impact, ie, ball flight would be straighter right from the git-go. Is this because there is less opening and closing of clubface for this kind of swing?
ME: I don't know for sure but I don't think so. I think keeping the club more in front of the body has more to do with the club staying relatively more along the target line than a club which moves far inside. Didn't Mindy claim that he moved only about 17* from straight back on his backswing? Concerning Mindy not opening and closing the clubface very much during his swing, it is well known here that I think he was mistaken. I contend that Mindy rotated the clubface as much as most conventional golfers do. I think that the Mike Douglas video supports my contention. I also think that some of Mindy's drawings in his books support that contention (while others are unintentional distortions of reality). For example, look at Figs. 25, 29b, and 30 in TGSOTF. Fig. 25 shows Mindy at address. The clubface is square to the ball. Look at Mindy's watch on his left wrist. The watch face is pointing toward the target. Now look at Fig. 29b. Mindy is at the 6/100 position. The watch face is pointing 90* away from the target, as presumably must also point the clubface. That means that the club face has rotated 90* open from its address position. Now look at impact in Fig. 30. The clubface is again square to the ball but the watch face is shown to be nearly 90* open to the target line. To me, either something isn't right about one or more of these drawings or the club slips around a lot in Mindy's left hand during the swing, or both the drawings are wrong and the club slips. What do you think about it?

JIM ASKED: Do you think an open stance is a useful trait in the golf swing?
ME: I think it can be useful for some golfers and for some shots.

JIM ASKED: Is anything lost with an open stance?
ME: I think that there is a loss of distance due to a lessened clubhead speed on full shots. I think we can move our arms faster on the downswing when we take the club inside on the backswing. The difference in speed is not great perhaps, but it is still significant with a Driver - perhaps 20 yards less on an otherwise 250 yard drive.

Tom

But you are wrong at least to some degree. Think viewer's perspective.
To demonstrate stand yourself in front of a mirror with your left hand
in front of your left leg and square as Mindy said. You can't see the
back of the hand. Now take it back without rotating it and without moving
your head or the rest of yourself. Now you can see the back of your left hand
because because it relocated in reference to your viewpoint.

Remember also that a camera would probably be at an even lower height
than your eyes are in the mirror view which would make the back of
the left hand even more visible past waist height.

Think of watching a car going by you from the sidewalk.

In GTTB, Takeaway section Blake wrote:

"Blake's words in GTTB (in Backswing section): "As the left hand pushes the club straight back, the action of keeping the clubface square to the line of flight causes the left hand to turn anti-clockwise, with the left thumb moving up and over."

If you start with back of left hand pointed targetward and do what Blake said in the instruction above, ie, turn the left hand 'anti-clockwise', would that not cause back of left hand to become oriented toward the ground? But that's not what is shown in the drawings of both GSOTF and GTTB. Rather, back of left hand turns 'outward' and faces away from the body. Blake says that keeps the clubface square, but does it? Try this: with a club in your left hand only, set club at addres position orienting back of left hand targetward as shown in the address drawings, now take the club back while turning back of left hand to be oriented away from your body. What happens to the clubface? Does it open, stay square or close? Jim

You have to account for the position of the camera or
the artist's eye. The hand "turning anti-clockwise"
while going back is also traveling up an inclined plane.
Not as inclined for Blake as for other methods but
still inclined. So the camera or the artists eye is
not looking at the hand halfway back from anywhere
near the same angle as at address.

....with all due respect, I think you are unnecessarily complicating the issue. The camera position, or the 'artist's eye' as you say, does not change in figures 9, 11, 14, and 15 (of GTTB), ie, it's a direct (so-called) 'face-on' orientation to the golfer. In figure 9 back of golfer's left hand is oriented toward the target (address). In figures 11 (end of takeaway), 14 (during backswing) and 15 (top of backswing) back of left hand is facing away from the golfer. This motion is easy to mimic. The question remains: with respect to the clubface, does it open, stay square, or close when you take this action? Jim

Looking toward Mindy from the targetward perspective Fig. 10 shows Address and the back of the left hand is fully visible. Fig. 12 shows the Takeaway (presumably just after grip completion) - the back of the left hand is now facing approximately 90* open to the Address position. I don't think that parallax explains these view discrepancies.

Tom

Using your previously demonstrated excellent photography skills.
Set up a camera and shoot your address and take the club back as
Mindy instructed and shoot again. Perhaps you are correct and I'm
making too much of angles and perspective.

cd - I think what you are decscribing is a sort of parallax view. To that extent, yes the watch face does become visible, but not straight on visible as is the case in the Mindy book drawings. Think of a watch that shoots bullets straight out from the center of its face. If Mindy were wearing such a watch then at address he would be shooting bullets out toward the target (perhaps a couple of feet left of target?). However, at 6/100 Mindy would be shooting bullets at the camera man! Yet he erroneously describes a swing that would be shooting bullets into the ground at an extension of the ball to target line.

I think Mindy was mistaken in some aspects of his theory as well as in some aspects of his practice. For example, his "Pressure Theory" is flat out incorrect. And in spite of his description of his own swing he does not keep the club face square to the target line. The "Mike Douglas" film of Mindy shows that he opens and closes the face much like all fine golfers (and most poor golfers too) open and close the face. Perhaps it is the manner in which he opens and closes it that is significant?

BTW, what do you think of the impact drawing (Fig. 30)? Shouldn't the watch face be largely invisible again much the same as it was at address? What do you think is going on in that view? Does the club perhaps move around in Mindy's hand during the swing? I think the drawing is inaccurate.

Tom

Having done a lot of sketching myself I can appreciate the
difficulty in rendering a truly realistic drawing of an athletic
event. The drawings I would not trust except as to a general
attitude along with accompanying text. As we know, the text
is also open to opinion. I think Blake did his damnedest to
communicate what he was doing and what he felt.

If he is of no help to you then you are right to seek elsewhere.
I remember Bob Toski pictured riding an ocean wave into his
downswing. That was voted one of the most helpful images ever
published in a major mag. Apparently it helped a lot of people.
Go figure.

Who said I thought Mindy was of no help?
By all accounts (Jim, Richard, magazine authors, etc.) Mindy hit the ball straight. I want to find out how he did it. It's useful I think to be wary of the instructions that were mistaken rather than to adhere to them as though they were accurate. Surely Mindy's straightness is connected to physical movements he actually performed and not to movements that never happened.

Tom

was shown to be doing something opposed to what he thought
he was doing.

As for Mindy I'm sure he examined and approved all drawings.
Dante did too but there are several that show a cupped left wrist at
top of swing.

I'm pretty sure the drawings for Mindy's two books were done from photos of Mindy. I have a few of the photos, such as the 'garden rake' photos apparently used for the 'swinging outsize club' drawings. But the photos were likely of static poses not dynamic ones. Dynamic photos could have been made with very fast film, but the simpler, less expensive method would have been static poses. Naturally, Blake would have posed himself as he thought his swing worked, not necessarily how it actually worked. Presumably, this would correspond with his written instructions. However, that wouldn't explain why he wrote that his left hand turned anti-clockwise in the backswing when the drawings seem to show that it didn't. Jim

Below is the address to some more Mindy photos extracted from the Maike Douglas Show. In this sequence Mindy was demonstrating to Mike how the club goes back and down. Mindy did not hit a ball in this sequence and he stopped his motion near impact.

What is significant in this sequence is that Mindy opens the face considerably during the last portion of the backswing after holding it square (hooding it) during the first portion. I think it is likely that the "grip completion" is what ultimately opens the face.

Notice the "toe up" position of the club at the top of Mindy's swing. I don't think that parallax explains what the photos reveal.

Tom




Address:http://community-2.webtv.net/Nooning/MindyBlake/index.html