In continuing a brief review of what has been covered thus far, I restate here that when giving children the same ball and the same implement with which to hit that ball, it is considerably easier for them to drop the ball dead on the ground, swing back and forth, and hit it as opposed to the greater difficulty of hitting the same ball when it is in motion. This is true even when the children simply lob the ball up into the air themselves in order to hit it on the way down. How about someone else trying to pitch the ball to and prevent them from hitting it? Hitting a moving object obviously requires added skill and greater athletic aptitude. Rationally speaking, it makes no sense whatsoever to conclude that a golf swing is a difficult activity to master relative to some of the genuinely incredible feats that humans have been able to accomplish throughout history. But even if you disagree with this reasoning at this point, at the very least do not be so foolish as to conclude that the traditional method of gripping a golf club is a means to help better develop this “difficult” activity called a golf swing. The two aspects are unrelated, a correct fact to remember on the road to learning to play well. Mistakenly associating these two elements as going together will result in a dead end of knowledge down that road. Keep in mind I can further reduce the size of a golf ball so that the best players on the planet cannot even find it let alone hit, but this is a different issue of playing the game that needs to be addressed separately and not confused with the issue of how hard or easy it is to develop a golf swing that enables one to play well.
Supported by this knowledge, the biggest reason for developing a clubless golf grip and swing always has been and always will be to unconditionally omit the constant switching between multiple golf clubs and the resultant multiple detrimental effects this can have when trying to accurately analyze and work on one’s golf swing (also needed to best fit golf clubs to one’s swing as will be seen). The routine occurrence of switching clubs for successive strokes is why developing a limb-only grip and swing is essentially mandatory in golf if one is to best learn about and succeed at the various, unique facets of the game. Such a procedure is not as critical in activities where the identical equipment is used time after time in the performance of the activity. I also reiterate that those who claim good players can swing and play well with any clubs are expressing a very confined viewpoint, namely a rather narrow range of club specifications that have been proven to work well for humans over a long period of time. This belief has a limited range of application, and it would not hold true over a broader range of club specifications. With a limb-only grip and swing, however, no such limitation exists, a highly desirable trait for certain tasks.
Beyond the development of a clubless golf grip and swing for completely eliminating golf clubs from the equation (required to objectively obtain specified fundamental data), it is barely less important to develop a limb-only grip and swing for referencing against, distinguishing between, and addressing as necessary many other potential swing-DNA-altering elements. Such elements can be quite powerful, even when one’s equipment is not changed from swing to swing. One example might involve a very ill-fitting golf club, a fairly common event even when fitted by any given so-called “professional” clubfitter. Other elements include but are not limited to all aspects of one’s wearing apparel. This is an element that needs more attention in golf than in other “uniformed” activities, as the rules of golf allow a much broader range of clothing options on the part of a performer. These options can profoundly affect one’s swing DNA but are oftentimes ignored in golf. A limb-only golf grip and swing can help one distinguish between these various apparel effects more effectively than if any non-perfect golf club were also involved. I have also explained before that there is a greater sensitivity to swing and/or equipment changes due to swinging at a stationary object as in golf, yet another good reason to pursue developing the most sensible, stripped-down, clubless swing for which to reference against all swings made with other swing-influencing, external factors added in. It is noted here that even in activities where the identical equipment is used time after time and/or where specific uniforms are mandated to be worn, it can still be advantageous to develop and practice limb-only movements and/or positions. All kinds of performers in all types of activities can often be seen doing just that. But nowhere is such a concept more critical to learn than in golf.
I am probably still unintentionally missing some points, but so far I have at least revealed several golf swing DNA particulars that make right some inaccurate theories of the past and that will stabilize those principles in the future. In practice, some of this theory may never plausibly be applied. But perhaps I have opened your mind to one or more items that you previously never even considered, taken too seriously or not seriously enough, or one or more items that you were possibly downright wrong about. I hope at the very least I have been able to convincingly impress upon you how critical it is to remove one’s golf clubs from the equation and to determine one’s swing DNA in that manner. Not being able to do so will result in less success at virtually every facet and level of the game, from swinging and equipment fitting facets, to physical and psychological levels (ultimately filtering down to course management success as well). Linking the limb-only swinging process to various swinging styles will be discussed next.