ThighMaster move from DG Spin Doctor

[itlnstln]

If the East/West spine tilt controls the hyzer angle, what controls the elevation angle? North/South tilt? Because sometimes we need to throw level or below, sometimes much higher?

Assuming we're talking about elevation from a flat tee, for example, that's how I approach elevation. It's a little easier to throw uphill, IMO, since I can get on my back leg. Down hill is harder, IMO, since leaning over the front foot down hill makes for tricky balance

 

[Brychanus]

Isnt Simon basically leaning backwards here demonstrating an anhyzer?

I do think there's some fluency in the posture control in addition to the overall tilt and Neil is showing some examples.

Recommend: once you account for differences in the camera angle and his footwork along the ground, watch how Simon is still swinging/pulling his throwing shoulder stacked relative to the leading knee and ankle.

 

[RowingBoats]

When I throw more extreme hyzer flips, the more I hyzer the easier it is to throw higher than I want, so in addition to the above I also raise my reach back a bit more.

I do understand what you are saying, but I think a lot of this type of analysis of what physical positions you see people get into is the wrong path in the end.

Thinking about what your body is doing leads to this type of issue. I bet you any amount of money that pros don't think like this at all, and are solely thinking about the disc itself. Concentrating on the disc and not your body goes a long way to letting a ton of different backswings work for a ton of different shapes.

 

[disc-golf-neil]

I do understand what you are saying, but I think a lot of this type of analysis of what physical positions you see people get into is the wrong path in the end.

Thinking about what your body is doing leads to this type of issue. I bet you any amount of money that pros don't think like this at all, and are solely thinking about the disc itself. Concentrating on the disc and not your body goes a long way to letting a ton of different backswings work for a ton of different shapes.

Some pros definitely have thought very analytically about these things in order to compose targeted training to commit it to muscle memory to the point where they no longer have to think about it. How do you think pros deliberately adjust their form during the off season, does it just magically change without thought? I've asked Gannon Buhr a handful of technical, analytical, mechanical questions, and most times he's already clearly thought about at an analytical level based on how detailed and immediate his answers are, and he clearly gets excited to talk about the details.

What in the hell does "solely thinking about the disc itself" even mean? Thinking about reachback height IS thinking about the disc because when I think to lower or raise my reachback I can see and feel how this raises or lowers the disc and visualize the pullthrough line from the reachback height and the resulting trajectory and flight. Thinking about the reachback only makes sense because the disc is in context.

 

[Brychanus]

 

[Brychanus]

Aroldis "Thighmaster/Turbo Encabulator Master" Chapman:

 

[Jaani]

Once again: the Thighmaster move happens after the plant.

 

[Brychanus]

Can continue to point out in that case at least one difference in theoretical role of interior leg load & unload in locomotion (turbo encabulator; Sidewinder) vs. Thighmaster (Jaani).

 

[Sheep]

okay, just going here with this one because I can barely walk, and have nothing better to do.

At no point in the video do I ever see a single thing that is related to or similiar to what Jaani is talking about in the thighmaster from "turbo encabulator."

There is some drill movements where you are moving your leg for balance reasons, but nothing in there really translates to anything similiar to what jaani is talking about whatsoever.

 

[Brychanus]

Just from having the benefit of messing with both considerably now and watching everyone's motion a lot, I'll continue to maintain "technical neutrality" when comparing and contrasting moves regardless of how it was initially stated, which I'm finding personally instructive:

Turbo Encabulator has more interior muscle activation in a sequence much more like Chapman's. Notice that the rear leg counterbalance changes depending on how tall the posture is, how big the move is, and how forward facing or not you are (I.e., pitching overhand forward on one extreme, and throwing a disc backhand on the other).

Jaani's (like he is saying) is clearly more activated after the plant, or at minimum is "adding on" to any interior muscle tone that may have been there coming off the rear leg before the plant.

Turbo Encabulator encodes the rear leg interior activation and counterbalancing but requires the chapman-like sequence and posture (turned more Backhand direction) to work, and the interior muscle action functions more like a smoother flow of action with a bigger emphasis on a lateral shift. There is definitely a "spring-like" effect overall coming off the rear leg, including the rear interior leg muscles.

FWIW most people who do Turbo Encabulator incorrectly have trouble getting the "Chapman effect" because you need good leverage in the right spots and very good balance for it to work. And I'm increasingly suspecting people don't have the "right" interior muscle tone and stability to use it optimally. A conscious focus on the tone of the interior muscles each way can potentially shore up that move.

I need more "Thighmaster" in Jaani's meaning in my move the less internal rotation I allow in the rear leg and/or the more I spin off the rear leg. I need more turbo Encabulator in my move if I remain more center balanced leg to leg and focus on more lateral Hershyzer and "shifting underneath" off the rear leg.

 

[Sheep]

I literally just watched it and don't see any point in the video where he's talking about the same thing except in putting your off foot behind your brace in a drill. So I'm still not gathering any level of correlation. Maybe he's got more than one video called turbo encabulator. but.. at no point did it ever talk about anything close to what Jaani is talking about or demonstrate it.

Just swinging back and forth and tucking your feet behind each other is a drill for balance and movement, we don't throw like that.

I think really what might be the main issue here, other than the name of the video, is that there is far far far far to much reference material that is needed for the turbo encabulator concept to stand on its own.
And you're arguing your point from having a fully studied reference standpoint on sidewinders video with all the supporting documents and video's, while Jaani's video stands on its own with what he's talking about.

 

[Brychanus]

Need/I needed to watch how he moves and figure out how it is generating the movement, not just want he says. The squeeze the pole part of the ride the bull seems crucial to the interior sequence I am talking about in the prior post. The "squeeze" can be independently exaggerated or toned down too of course.

Edit: i.e. probably also what is in common with the Chapman move because a lot of the mechanics concepts are borrowed from shifts similar to that.

Edit2: if you include the squeeze of the pool stick in the ride the bull and otherwise similar posture and leverage, you get the counterbalancing/kick behind effect, which is part of why Sidewinder tends to conceptualize it as an effect of other parts of the shift and emphasizes a different sequence.

 

[Sheep]

Need/I needed to watch how he moves and figure out how it is generating the movement, not just want he says. The squeeze the pole part of the ride the bull seems crucial to the interior sequence I am talking about in the prior post. The "squeeze" can be independently exaggerated or toned down too of course.

Edit: i.e. probably also what is in common with the Chapman move because a lot of the mechanics concepts are borrowed from shifts similar to that.

Edit2: if you include the squeeze of the pool stick in the ride the bull and otherwise similar posture and leverage, you get the counterbalancing/kick behind effect, which is part of why Sidewinder tends to conceptualize it as an effect of other parts of the shift and emphasizes a different sequence.

I think the main issue here is that we shouldn't need a decoder ring to figure that out.

I watched it TRYING to find the correlations and never caught any of that. I watch this video and its appearing more of a "here are some drills and ways to do them to help you move better." which.. drills help us get into position or move right, they don't necessarily mean anything to the swing because things are over exagerated to get you there.

So, I'm going to make the claim here were grasping at straws to try and correlate the 2 video's in any fashion.

Perhaps SW's intentions were closer to Jaani's, but that isn't demonstrated or really explained in any fashion that pertains to the swing as a whole.

 

[Brychanus]

I generally agree with not needing a decoder ring.

In most of his moves SW literally just wants people to do them as designed so they have their effects. Which is more or less exactly what most people who like KISS claim they want. That's why I need to do them reasonably close to what he is showing and then whatever other things I'm comparing them to to be able to write the sentences like the above. Almost all of SW's drills are variations on weight shifting theory plus parts of the swing (swull, pull, whatever you like). The large move like turbo Encabulator are basically most of the entire move if you adjustments for putting a disc in your hand to throw. I still find it interesting how much trouble people have doing it exactly the way he shows it even though the original intent is exactly "KISS" in many cases.

Jaani's own move is fairly straightforward at face value and fairly easy to implement without any further context. So comparing and contrasting them to figure out what - if anything - is different is interesting to me. I have attempted to write in words what some of the possible distances and their tradeoffs may be, including prerequisites. That may help exactly no one else.

On the other hand, there are more than the handful of people who care to comment here that may find something written instructive, in which case I'm ok with the risk assessment in saying anything more than nothing at all, personally.

Notice that I remain open to feedback and I am doing my best to maintain a technically neutral tone when discussing all of this. I only care about the mechanics when I comment.

Edit: also important to say that this thread has been a place where despite some of the more barbed comments, interactions with and between the creators of each bit of content has been a relatively rare occurrence relative to anywhere other than DGCR. I have found that valuable so thanks again @Jaani and @sidewinder22. Neither of you are obligated to respond to anyone else or each other, and I have appreciated it when you do since it has helped me understand where each of you are coming from and compare and contrast moves myself. In the short run I understand if that is only a sliver of the bigger picture, but it is maybe part of it.