Hey, Sidewinder pretty much gave a negative critique of Paul Omans mechanics. Im just wondering if his own throw is superior.

Somebody here is a fraud. That's for sure.

Once again there are too many threads here to discuss pretty much the same thing but you could leave out the strong part in that term and just say arming. You can either do it with muscle tension or with a limp arm. Infact your throw is a good example of limp arming the disc.

Man running backwards with an internally rotated front shoulder turns forward and swings a limp arm out to external rotation, there is no shoulder turn which means there is no hips. That front shoulder gives the illusion and maybe the feel as if your shoulder were turning but thats not true. So you are just going from neutral to open.
https://youtu.be/RIY8hZh9UWw

Great example video of what not to do.
Bad shoulder angle, dragging the disc along / rounding / "strong-shouldering", no brace, backwards x-step, open hips, open lead foot, the timing is way off, chicken wing follow through, flailing off-arm, bad balance... The list goes on.
Hmm.. May I suggest you try and be more explosive Rodeo? Lol. That might work for you! :D

Regadless I assume RoDeo joined this forum to learn and not get bashed. I think it is good to question things but it´s another thing to straight up refuse advice from professional players and more experienced players here.

I totally agree. Every thread seems to be hijacked by Rodeo and his preaching right now.
It's not even worth reading through the new posts anymore.
It blows my mind how it seems to be ok for one person to keep going off-topic and stir up every thread like that. And it makes it really difficult to discuss the original questions. This is a great example. My own post is as off topic as can be, sadly.

Can someone list down the proper kinetic sequence of a backhand throw?

Trying to start a proper conversation

Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk

So many issues to unpack.

1) Pointing out issues is not a "negative critique." Seems like you couldn't handle seeing any criticism whatsoever of something you deemed a "perfect showcase."

If you think it is perfect, then you must think pushing off the ground with your heel is ideal. So it follows that you think when you jump, run, etc. you should be doing so on your heels, and that anyone pushing off with their toes/ball of foot is doing it wrong.

2) You seem to be using Paul Oman as a proxy for yourself. Since you can't throw far, you are adopting someone who can in order to argue from a position of someone with 500' of distance. But wondering if someone else's throw is comparable to yet another person's throw won't improve your own throw. Regardless of the answer, the reality is you are still throwing 350' or whatever. You are not Paul Oman, nor are you SW. It is more productive to evaluate the throw/critique on its own merits, not on the thrower/critic.

3) Whether someone throws 500'+ doesn't really even seem to matter to you since you have disregarded advice from multiple 500'+ throwers.

4) SW's critique is actually useful as it points out what is going on both in terms of form but also mechanically. Not everyone has the levers that Paul Oman does. If someone with a shorter build were to copy Paul Oman exactly, they wouldn't get the same distance because of the different mechanical advantage. It's like those ball launchers for throwing a ball when playing with dogs. Having the longer lever makes a difference.

5) Do you want to be "right," (validate your theory) or do you want to "win" (improve your distance)? Before addressing any substantive content, your positions have been inconsistent, contradictory, and illogical. It seems like you are seeking validation over understanding. If you can demonstrate understanding (through specific substantive analysis rather than vague value judgments) then your words will hold more weight. "Seek first to understand, then to be understood."

Good call!

I found this vid from 2015 from HUB. Hadn’t seen this one before but the angle and speed of his camera really shows the kinetic chain from a different angle.


https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forum...d.php?t=114205

There's a pretty good list in the first post of the thread.