Question:
Has anyone tried Gravity Golf? Just curious. Has anyone tried Natural Golf ? Looks a little hokey,esp since they have developed their own line of balls,clubs, gloves, etc.
Response:
Has anyone tried Gravity Golf? Just curious. Has anyone tried Natural Golf ? Looks a little hokey,esp since they have developed their own line of balls,clubs, gloves, etc.
Yeah it aggravated an already bad slice. I’m recovering though — bill-o
Response:
Has anyone tried Gravity Golf? Just curious.
GG was definitely worth a look – for me, anyway, I am not completely on board but I think there is some valuable stuff there. Puttster – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Has anyone tried Natural Golf ? Looks a little hokey,esp since they have developed their own line of balls,clubs, gloves, etc. Yeah it aggravated an already bad slice. I’m recovering though — bill-o
Response:
Has anyone tried Gravity Golf? Just curious. Has anyone tried Natural Golf ? Looks a little hokey,esp since they have developed their own line of balls,clubs, gloves, etc.
There’s a whole alternate universe out there…… they even have their own discussion board and many of them swear by it…. it’s called "single axis" methods……. looks valid enough, but you’re going to sacrifice significant distance to gain some accuracy….. it’s not my cup of tea, but here take a looksee: http://www.megspace.com/sports/moetown/ Viker 44
Response:
Has anyone tried Gravity Golf? Just curious. Has anyone tried Natural Golf ? Looks a little hokey,esp since they have developed their own line of balls,clubs, gloves, etc.
I don’t think Gravity Golf is that much of a new technique – just a different twist. Natural Golf is basically a different technique, loosely based on the great ballstriker Moe Norman’s technique. But beware – it’s become a big money-making system, and isn’t really true to Norman’s original method, and anyway it was probably best for Norman but not necessarily you.
Response:
Has anyone tried Gravity Golf? Just curious.
I am familiar with it. Has anyone tried Natural Golf ? Looks a little hokey,esp since they have developed their own line of balls,clubs, gloves, etc.
My sentiments exactly. The two methods are as different as night and day. To my way of thinking, the differences can be summed up in this way: Gravity Golf is a different way of seeing the golf swing. It is a different approach, but is designed to accomplish basically a traditional swing. The fundamentals of it simply are this: rather than exerting force by flexing your upper body muscles, thereby introducing a degree of tension in the swing, they recommend a totally free-flowing motion, letting "gravity" do most of the work for you. There are some excellent drills that teach how how NOT do make a proper swing, and they are designed to amplify your mistakes by identifying where you’re introducing tension ("flexation") into your swing. Natural Golf, on the other hand, deviates significantly from a traditional golf swing. It is, in my view, essentially a "single axis" swing, which makes it fairly easy to learn. To my way of thinking, it’s designed for the player who’s tried everything and is just this much shy of giving up the game. It’s a last resort. That said, there are evidently quite a few people who swear by it. Nobody worth nothing has ever used this method on the professional tours and had any sustained success with it. Sandy Lyle is, I suppose, the biggest "name" who is now on board with it, but he wasn’t using it when he won the Masters and British Open. (And if anyone has seen him play lately, I’d be curious if he’s actually using that silly grip they teach in Natural Golf. My suspicion is that he’s incorporating *some* of it, but not all.) Randy
Response:
No direct experience with Natural Golf, but I’ve met and played with a few people using it. A couple of guys just once, but another guy I played with on several occasions. They all seemed to be very positive about it, and hit the ball very well … better than me for the most part 8^(. I was tempted to try it, but was too afraid it would screw up the progress I had made with the more traditional rotary swing. The basics (as I understand) are to hold the club in your palms (thus the bigger grips), take a wide stance, and swing the club as straight back and down the target line as you can (no pivot/rotation). The theory does make some sense IMO, but I’m just not convinced that it’s necessarily "easier" or "better". Rob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Has anyone tried Gravity Golf? Just curious. Has anyone tried Natural Golf ? Looks a little hokey,esp since they have developed their own line of balls,clubs, gloves, etc.
Response:
BEWARE! One week I went out to our local driving range and there was a guy there with a big banner announcing he was giving lessons in Natural Golf. The next week the driving range had gone belly-up. Coincidence?? Dave Clary/Corpus Christi,TX Home: http://home.stx.rr.com/dclary Never Forget: http://www.politicsandprotest.org RSG Roll Call http://www.rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=claryd
Response:
response to self… Has anyone tried Natural Golf ?
I got the Jerry Heard Super Swing video and book for $25 and it was really a pretty good deal. He promotes a single axis swing and you get to keep your same clubs. Randy described NG as for people who are this close to quitting and that is a pretty good description. If that’s you, that $25 might save you. I would not worry too much that no pros on tour use his method. For most of us, breaking 90 consistently is a bigger worry that getting on tour, I think. Puttster
Response:
Has anyone tried Gravity Golf? Just curious. Has anyone tried Natural Golf ? Looks a little hokey,esp since they have developed their own line of balls,clubs, gloves, etc.
i tried natural Golf briefly and had no success at all. I don’t believe that there is anything inherently "natural" about it. With the palm grip, i was hooking like crazy and hitting a lot of fat shots. And with the abbreviated swing they recommended, i felt a huge power loss. i did hit some good shots also, but i think it was simply luck, rather than this method. The other thing that bothered me was all the marketing literatiure i received from the NG folks. They make it seem that you need special clubs, grips, etc to make this system work optimally. Now i do have a friend who went to the three day NG school and he swears by it. I played with him this past weekend and he shot one round of 79. His swing is orthodox NG with the palm grip, swing to shoulder height, facing the ball on impact, etc. So maybe there is something to NG, but i think it is a case of different strokes for differnt folks, but i don’t believe NG is any easier or more precise than "conventional" golf Eric
Response:
response to self… Has anyone tried Natural Golf ? I got the Jerry Heard Super Swing video and book for $25 and it was really a pretty good deal. He promotes a single axis swing and you get to keep your same clubs. Randy described NG as for people who are this close to quitting and that is a pretty good description. If that’s you, that $25 might save you. I would not worry too much that no pros on tour use his method. For most of us, breaking 90 consistently is a bigger worry that getting on tour, I think. Puttster
Reading through the SA website I provided, I learned a lot about Jerry Heard’s swing methods… Using that, SLAP, Hibb, and a few other books, I developed a new way of gripping the club that combines elements of each grip… so far, so good…… gives me greater accuracy and distance is just as good or better….. Point is, don’t dismiss some of these theories out of hand….. you can pick up some tips from every style and incorporate them into your own game…… being close minded only limits what you can achieve…… if the style doesn’t end up suiting you, so what? At least you gave it a shot and can Viker 44
Response:
No direct experience with Natural Golf, but I’ve met and played with a few people using it. A couple of guys just once, but another guy I played with on several occasions. They all seemed to be very positive about it, and hit the ball very well … better than me for the most part 8^(. I was tempted to try it, but was too afraid it would screw up the progress I had made with the more traditional rotary swing. The basics (as I understand) are to hold the club in your palms (thus the bigger grips), take a wide stance, and swing the club as straight back and down the target line as you can (no pivot/rotation). The theory does make some sense IMO, but I’m just not convinced that it’s necessarily "easier" or "better".
If you were to really give it a shot, I think it would be relatively easy to learn and repeat….. It’s fairly straight forward… It should also give you a little more accuracy….. my problem with it is the obvious loss of distance So, overall, for a beginner or someone who simply cannot improve with traditional methods, it would be easier…… but I don’t agree that it is Viker 44