Mechanical Advantage/Simple Swing/Efficient Swing
 

Homer has given us a catalog of components to choose from . . . . you hear many talking heads on tv and instructors speaking of "that is a simple motion" . . . "he's got few moving part" . . . "that is an efficient swing" . . . "what a simple swing" . . . .

What do you think they mean? Do they have a clue? What is a "simple" and "efficient" swing to you? What components would you choose and why would you put them together in such a way?

Holla.

Machiner out of Texas

This qualifies in my book.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwPZU...layer_embedded

Beautiful simple swing, without a doubt! Along the lines of a simple, one plane type motion, I love Tommy Armour III and Mike Bennet's S&T patterns.

In the end, I'll go with what Homer Kelley said not long before he died, and what I believe is used as the base of Mr. Blake's hitting pattern.

Sorry, nothing original from me, again. :) Sometimes simple is the key...

Kevin

This swing is pretty simple.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTG15cSlHHw

Simple Swing = Fewest Compensations. But simple doesn't equate to greater repeatability. There are some pretty heavily compensated swings on the Tour.

Few moving parts is a comment that makes little sense. An effective swing has lots of moving parts, Knudson once said the only thing that does not move in the swing is his left big toe. The answer may lie in the name of Lynn's dvd, Alignment. Whenever my game breaks down on the course, if I simply go back to a right forearm takeaway and hands controlled pivot, my swing gains a smoothness due to the alignment of pivot, hands and clubshaft. If those are aligned, boom.

Drawing Interest
 

The most efficient motion is the one that puts money in the bank.

According to Rachel Uchitel

Define "compensations" . . . . compensated would infer a standard.

What "alignments in the pivot, hands and clubshaft"? Not trying to be a wiseazz . . . just trying to define terms.