OT: For the Golfers: Is this Guy's Physique Conducive to Excelling in the Sport?

[verticaldoug]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/s...au-weight.html

He evidently is the equivalent of Aaron Judge (or the Arnold Schwarzenegger in the golf world. As a personal trainer, I'm always intrigued by how physique affects performance. I know that (similar to swinging a bat), a lot of the power is generated by the hip flexors and deep core muscles.

Does anyone who golfs regularly know about this guy? Any thoughts on how his desire to really bulk up can improve his game or perhaps set a new standard?

Isn't this essentially the same reason Tiger used performance enhancers and decided to bulk up? He needed to hit longer besides just being a finesse game. This guy has just taken it another notch. Not unlike Barry Bonds wanting to bulk up.

Probably led to his back issues. No free lunch. At least long term, no free lunch.

[Mr. Pink]

Wait. When has it ever been proven that Tiger used "performance enhancers"?

[benb]

You can talk about club head speed (or bat speed) all you want but that requires acceleration, the club or bat head starts at rest.

More acceleration requires more force since the club or bat isn't changing mass during the swing.

So these guys are obviously on the right track to work on generating more force & work (the swing is not instantaneous) by getting stronger.

I think other sports have more than proved by now that the actual weight training is not causing issues.

Golf, Baseball, tennis, all these swinging and twisting motions are super unnatural and its obvious backs/knees/hips/shoulders were not designed to move that way. I think it's been pretty well proven that strengthening all the muscles around these joints is not bad.. but maybe in the case of something like golf where you're doing things like twisting the meniscus in the knees in ways they're just not made for being in better shape may still not help in the long term.

The out of shape guys seem to have all kinds of issues too.

I think the "40lbs of lean mass over the winter" is the dog whistle of PEDs. It always has been.

I don't really golf... I can sure say as a cyclist going occasionally to the driving range hitting golf balls is really revealing just how weak all the lateral & core structures & twisting stabilizers can atrophy from cycling.

[veloduffer]

As an avid hacker (13 handicap), I can provide a bit more background.

The one-length irons concept has been around for decades. Bryson rejuvenated the idea when he won top amateur and collegiate tournaments with homemade one-length irons (he was a physics major). Cobra sponsors him and has offered their irons in both variable (traditional) and one-length options. These are better than the one-length of the past due to new metal faces and designs that allow you the same distance as a traditional set, which has the benefit of a higher swing speed from the longer shafts.

I've played the one-length (same length as a 7- or 8-iron) and found the longer irons (4-6 irons) easier to hit. Flight is lower and less carry but with the roll the length is roughly the same. The higher lofted irons and wedges hit much higher. For folks who struggle with irons and beginners, the one length is much easier to hit.

As for Bryson's bulk up, he is crushing the ball and is hitting some 40 yards past top drivers like Rory McElroy, Dustin Johnson and Justin Thomas. But you don't have to be big to be a long driver - Justin Thomas is a top 10 driver and is 5'9" and weighs about 150 lbs. Rory is about the same height but more muscular. And Dustin Johnson is 6'4" but slender. Tiger took golf to another physical level and most of the top players work out.

There's been some talk about the modern golf swing, which uses a lot of torque by twisting the upper body against a stable lower body - the swing just unwinds and the players try to hit against a stiffer left side (assuming you're right handed), like a baseball swing. It's a shorter and more compact swing. The result is more knee injuries (e.g. Tiger) and upper body strains. Also, golfers get a lot of injuries from just the repetitive actions - wrists and elbows take a beating from hitting thousands of golf balls into the ground (iron strokes) at the range and course. Nearly all the players practice before and well after their competitive golf round.

The more old school swing is like Phil Mickelson - longer, fluid and uses more legs. I think this is why Phil has been relatively injury free and is playing still at top levels at 50 yrs old. If you look at any photos or videos of Johnny Miller and Jack Nicklaus, very different swing compared to today.

I think Bryson could become more injury prone. Like a lot of baseball players who bulk up (steriods or not), they are much more injury prone than more "natural" physiques like Jeter, Ripken, etc. For more "fluid sports", it's probably a long term detriment.

Probably the single most important reason for the longer hitting distances in golf is the modern golf ball - with various materials, layers, dimple effects - ball flight (spin) and feel are optimized to get maximum distance. If Jack Nicklaus had today's golf ball, he might have won even more majors as he was already a long ball hitter.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by benb

You can talk about club head speed (or bat speed) all you want but that requires acceleration, the club or bat head starts at rest.

More acceleration requires more force since the club or bat isn't changing mass during the swing.

So these guys are obviously on the right track to work on generating more force & work (the swing is not instantaneous) by getting stronger.

I think other sports have more than proved by now that the actual weight training is not causing issues.

Golf, Baseball, tennis, all these swinging and twisting motions are super unnatural and its obvious backs/knees/hips/shoulders were not designed to move that way. I think it's been pretty well proven that strengthening all the muscles around these joints is not bad.. but maybe in the case of something like golf where you're doing things like twisting the meniscus in the knees in ways they're just not made for being in better shape may still not help in the long term.

The out of shape guys seem to have all kinds of issues too.

I think the "40lbs of lean mass over the winter" is the dog whistle of PEDs. It always has been.

I don't really golf... I can sure say as a cyclist going occasionally to the driving range hitting golf balls is really revealing just how weak all the lateral & core structures & twisting stabilizers can atrophy from cycling.

But functional strength and adding 40lbs of muscle mass are two entirely different things. As to your last comment...you bet.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by veloduffer

As an avid hacker (13 handicap), I can provide a bit more background.

The one-length irons concept has been around for decades. Bryson rejuvenated the idea when he won top amateur and collegiate tournaments with homemade one-length irons (he was a physics major). Cobra sponsors him and has offered their irons in both variable (traditional) and one-length options. These are better than the one-length of the past due to new metal faces and designs that allow you the same distance as a traditional set, which has the benefit of a higher swing speed from the longer shafts.

I've played the one-length (same length as a 7- or 8-iron) and found the longer irons (4-6 irons) easier to hit. Flight is lower and less carry but with the roll the length is roughly the same. The higher lofted irons and wedges hit much higher. For folks who struggle with irons and beginners, the one length is much easier to hit.

As for Bryson's bulk up, he is crushing the ball and is hitting some 40 yards past top drivers like Rory McElroy, Dustin Johnson and Justin Thomas. But you don't have to be big to be a long driver - Justin Thomas is a top 10 driver and is 5'9" and weighs about 150 lbs. Rory is about the same height but more muscular. And Dustin Johnson is 6'4" but slender. Tiger took golf to another physical level and most of the top players work out.

There's been some talk about the modern golf swing, which uses a lot of torque by twisting the upper body against a stable lower body - the swing just unwinds and the players try to hit against a stiffer left side (assuming you're right handed), like a baseball swing. It's a shorter and more compact swing. The result is more knee injuries (e.g. Tiger) and upper body strains. Also, golfers get a lot of injuries from just the repetitive actions - wrists and elbows take a beating from hitting thousands of golf balls into the ground (iron strokes) at the range and course. Nearly all the players practice before and well after their competitive golf round.

The more old school swing is like Phil Mickelson - longer, fluid and uses more legs. I think this is why Phil has been relatively injury free and is playing still at top levels at 50 yrs old. If you look at any photos or videos of Johnny Miller and Jack Nicklaus, very different swing compared to today.

I think Bryson could become more injury prone. Like a lot of baseball players who bulk up (steriods or not), they are much more injury prone than more "natural" physiques like Jeter, Ripken, etc. For more "fluid sports", it's probably a long term detriment.

Probably the single most important reason for the longer hitting distances in golf is the modern golf ball - with various materials, layers, dimple effects - ball flight (spin) and feel are optimized to get maximum distance. If Jack Nicklaus had today's golf ball, he might have won even more majors as he was already a long ball hitter.

Highly informative. Thanks. And I finally just "got" your tag. Duh.

[benb]

Golf requires no actual movement of the golfer other than the twisting though..

Surely it is not the same as cycling or hiking or rock climbing where the extra body mass creates more work that's a detriment.

The functional & mobility part is for sure part of it too.. go look at his physics stuff.

w = F x D.

f = ma

v = at + v0

A more flexible player can have a longer swing, more time and distance to accelerate the bat/club... perhaps not requiring the same instantaneous force to get to the same club/bat speed.

It would be interesting to see what kinds of specialized exercises these guys do to facilitate all the twisting motions.

I didn't play any baseball/football for at least 10 years at the height of my cycling, it was a total mess when I started having some opportunities to do so (mostly from having a kid). Doing the standard squats, bench press, etc.. did not help with those motions at all.

5 years ago I got in a batting cage and practically injured myself on the first swing I had so much imbalance & weakness in the stabilizers/lateral stuff/twisting stuff.

Same thing a few years ago when I suddenly wanted to climb again.. forget doing a pull up my shoulders didn't even want to be held above my head.

Ugh.. of course I hurt my back about a month ago again probably cycling related, that's been super tough to come back from this time.

[azrider]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

Yes it did, didn’t it?

I can’t think of any sports (save possibly a defensive lineman) where an excess of muscle mass comes in handy.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

I can’t think of any sports (save possibly a defensive lineman) where an excess of muscle mass comes in handy. As a personal trainer, I just don’t get that. It has no functional application.

This is tautological, as excess means more than is necessary. Even "average" professional football/baseball/basketball/hockey players are freakishly muscular in comparison to the typical population.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by azrider

Well geez Doug, if we're posting pics of our college years, let me go and dig up mine

Not sure the analogy is apt, though. Marty Nothstein was huge. But he was still 6'2 and 215, which is in the realm for a track cyclist.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by prototoast

This is tautological, as excess means more than is necessary. Even "average" professional football/baseball/basketball/hockey players are freakishly muscular in comparison to the typical population.

Yes, Dan, but the original post asked was the body type "conducive to excelling in that sport." As a trainer, I'm always intrigued by guys who want to "blow out" their biceps and chests. There's no functional application for these muscle groups. That's what Johnny Miller was referring to in the video posted by pbarry.

I just don't see the long-term benefit of a physique like that for golf.

[veloduffer]

Given the driving length of many of the top pros, course design has been debated too. Courses can't keep lengthening to keep up. Newer designs are going shorter (or staying even) but more turns (dog legs) and/or natural elements like weather and fescue. These require the pros to bend their shots and can help level the playing field between the long and shorter hitters.

The European courses tend to be more demanding in terms of shotmaking than US courses - one of the reasons why the Europeans win the Ryder Cup more often than the US team. The top Europeans play both the PGA/US tour and European tour tournaments and can win on either.

DeChambeau's new found length isn't a large benefit for tournaments like the British Open and somewhat Augusta.

[benb]

Isn't football about the closest thing with an application for for "blown out chest"?

Pushing each other around at the line seems like the closest thing.. as long as you did tons of squatting & dead lifting.

As for massive biceps right there with you. They're useless unless everything else is built up just right.

My thoughts on this is just that all the sports are on a spectrum from rewarding mass to punishing it. In this country we just seem to have gotten really fixated on ball sports that don't really punish mass because they're played on flat surfaces with very little moving time & tons of substitutions and breaks in play.

Football is something ridiculous like < 5 minutes average time moving in a game.

[veloduffer]

In professional sports, tennis is probably the most demanding physically, as you use your entire body, demanding pivots and stops, endurance and high skill level.

All their bodies are muscular but lithe. Nadal is probably the player with the most mass (often rumoured to have been on PEDs) and he has had a rash of injuries, particularly his knee.

[verticaldoug]

Originally Posted by Mr. Pink

Wait. When has it ever been proven that Tiger used "performance enhancers"?

Win at all cost mentality.

No drug testing in the sport until 2007/08

Relationship with doctors who are suspect

Striking physical changes.

(this recipe has never failed to disappoint)