Geoff Ogilvy v. Paul Casey didn't live up to the hype, but it was an enjoyable match to watch. Those two possess the 1A and 1B best swings in golf, and are completely different. Ogilvy's long and loping, controlled power swing and Casey's semi-crouched, compact, effortless pass are both enjoyable to watch. I believe Ogilvy has more winning success (in the US, at least) as his swing is more reliable under pressure. Casey's swing looks prone to a quick follow through and wristy-hook, where a quick swing by Ogilvy would only result in a pulled shot. Ogilvy also has better touch on quick, undulating greens.
What is in common with the best looking swings in the game (Ogilvy, Casey, Adam Scott, Baddeley, Luke Donald)? No Americans. The current American with what I consider the best swing is CH III. Ryan Moore's swing is a trainwreck. Why don't any young American golfers have swings of merit?
1 comment:
Oh boy, you hit a nerve here Ryan.
WHY don't any young Americans have good solid swings? Because that's not what they are taught.
The kids (and by kids, I mean 12-18 year olds) are taught to swing hard. The thought is that you can fix swing mechanics later, but it is awfully hard to teach speed and flexibility.
I've had my pro say this to me (about other pro's theories).
The American thought process for a good golf game NOW - as in since the Tiger era - is to overpower a course. Who needs a perfect swing when you can bomb away and birdie 3 of the 4 par 5s? Do that, you're -3 and have some cushion for your swing flaws.
It's so ironic - they are teaching this way because they want emulate Tiger, but are too short-sighted to realize that Tiger wins on the PGA tour due to 1) rock solid putting (disregarding the putt on the 19th on Friday) and 2) unbelieveable irons. The irons are a direct result of a almost perfect swing.
Nowadays, J.B. Holmes seems to be the poster child for under-30 aged golfers. That does not bode well.
Post a Comment