I've putted my entire life with a 35" putter - and fit my swing to my putter.

 

Once I figured out how to setup athletically and with my eyes slightly inside, I simply let my arms hang and grabbed my (ungripped) putter.  I then cut it off 1/2" where it exits my grip.

 

Feels much better, and I've had more 'confident' putting days with it.  It's down around 33" now.

Like the video but I feel a bit slow after watching it.  You sort of breeze through the proper set up with some casual references to RS 2.0 set up reminders "weight over ankles, shoulders pulled back," and I read ever day so I sort of get it, but I still get a bit puzzled over the arms hanging naturally vs. the shoulders (scapula?) pulled in tight and connected.  Those two things don't always FEEL right when I bend over to check my "alignment" for putting.  Heck, I have watched Allison's video a bunch of times and I still don't get what "stacked over the ankles" actually feels like or is supposed to feel like?  Just wondering if a couple lines drawn over your intial posture checks from the video might be helpful?  Or maybe I am the only one?  Either way, I have a hard time standing in front of this video trying to follow along and check my alignment.  Am I the only one standing in front of a computer mimicking  ? 

 

I have been using an old 2 ball with a 34' in center shaft in it and have posted before about the difficulty I have getting lined up on the Putting Plane with my eyes and shoulders in good postions while still feeling neutral in my body's set up?  I have been thinking my putter is too long?  I am about 6'2 with some long legs and arms.  Would that mean shorter than 34 or longer?  I thought this video would help answer that, but still confused.

 

Here's a personal opinion FWIW;

 

Right up front, I've always appreciated having a synopsis of what the goal or end result is and why the series of steps or training we're going to go through is way we're going to get to it.  In other words a lot of times sports instructors will provide a series of steps/drills to perform a certain task. They believe the end goal is obvious, if you're tennis player the end result is having a better backhand, forehand, serve or volley.  They directly proceed to some exercise/drill explaining the what and how but not the why.  I want to know why I'm doing something a given way vs doing it some other way.  As an engineer, I have to know why I'm going to do something before the what and how are even considered. It's not that I don't trust what's being presented, it just helps me to put the what and how into context.

 

Here's an example of what I mean.  When I coach soccer, I'll show my players certain moves and then how to do them. Soccer players will be familiar with coever moves and I'll use the Cruyff as an example;  To do it - Set-up in a passing position for a right foot pass. Right foot fakes a pass or kick, but circles around and in front of the ball (pointing at other toe at 90 degree angle). Using inside of the right foot, push the ball behind leg and spin off to left. Basically, a fake kick with a behind the leg cut.

 

OK so that's the how, but why.  The why is because it's a great move for a defender to use when they have the ball but are facing thier own goal with no outlet player to pass to and need to change directions. Also works well for an attacker that recieves the ball facing away from goal and needs to turn to.  This is why I believe the why is important, it's not always intuitively obvious and puts everything into context.  Just my $.02

 

BTW:  This is also why Ray thinks I'm incredulous although I'm not 

 

R/Bob

 

 

 

 

I have been hitting the ball really well and I don't ever want to have to wonder about what my arms are doing again, I want to keep things as simple as possible with the RS. I believe that all of this new biomechanical information will now just explain to us the exacts on how to properly turn and turn and will allow all of us RSers to properly feel how we are to execute the RS.

 

Chuck if you can answer this if not I understand...I assume there will be a huge need for a lot of us to go through some form of NMR (neuromuscular retraining) so will you address this in your DVD Chuck or will Alison have a cameo to discuss her stack method learning program or will she be putting out her own DVD to compliment yours.

 

I know a lot of what I'm about to ask you probably can't specifically answer but some general thoughts would be most appreciated.

 

- For people that want to keep everything as simple as possible, I'm guessing that with 2.0 we'll learn the correct setup & origins of movement for the entire golf swing. Since 1.0 is already as close or closer to any swing model currently out there that is already biomechanically correct I assume those things could be incorporated into what we've already learned IRT mechanics, positions, passive arms, etc... In other words, we can still just turn and turn but we'll understand specifically where we're turning from and how? In the simplist terms, I picture this as a more indepth description of the RS drill.  I.e., as you take the club back this is where you want to feel that you're starting the movement back and then as you get to the top, you're going to want to feel this in your transistion...?

 

- Some exercises/drills will be provided that help us to feel the correct muscles used  that originate movement? 

 

- It seems like there is also some metamorphisis going on with your swing mechanics.  If so, will that philosophy/model be included? 

 

Thanks,

Bob