Forming the whip by Overthrow Disc Golf

View attachment 331885
I certainly can't see any differences. /s

I think Josh is a really good coach, in how he communicates concepts and (i suspect) how he works with people one on one. And confidently stating things as fact rather than letting your students see the doubts and nuance is not necessarily a bad thing.

But I'm definitely not in agreement on this new direction, nor on the way it's expressed. If you want to tell people to engage the arm in some way, I think 'arm the disc' is about the worst language he could have chosen (though it will certainly get the videos a high view count). Sure, many amateurs, regardless of their current form, are going to find some quick distance gains from going full send - but is that really a good way to improve longer term? And 'arm the disc', to me, sounds much more like 'throw hard' than 'engage the arm a bit to keep it in the right places'. 🤷‍♂️

Does anyone in here agree with this statement looking at this image lol?
Well, the jury could decide:

1706840946933.png


1706840825487.png
1706840968319.png

1706841017466.png

1706841042051.png








FpeFm9t.gif



EeDzt7E.gif


pLMJ9Q9.gif

Well
 

Attachments

  • 1706840736040.png
    1706840736040.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 0
  • 1706840907500.png
    1706840907500.png
    310 KB · Views: 0
Well, the jury could decide:
...

pLMJ9Q9.gif

Well
Hey Brychanus, do you have a source for this KJUSA gif? This seems like a useful variation of a dingle arm that's specific to the power pocket and would love to see the original video if you have it!
 
I don't think I've ever hit the quote button that many times. Props to the upgrades to the forum though making this process far smoother for us and how it works.

I don't like selling the idea of an overcorrection being the solution. For example - nobody should be arming the disc. But if you're not using it at all because you're focusing on the shoulders and everything else, while being too loose or passive with the arm, I can see using an overcorrection to get the body into new territory. The "out-in-out" and "wide-narrow-wide" language is a better directive than "arm the disc."

I also don't like "uncurl" as a term. I'm not saying it's a made up word or anything like that, but in kinesiology we talk more about curling vs extending. As I commented in his Forming the Whip video, I think extend-curl-extend also fits the bill if we're talking about body mechanics. That said "out-in-out" has been around since at least 2019 (in my quick research on it) and is the quickest to type, with the least amount of syllables, so is the easiest to remember and teach.
I also think out-in-out is a simple easy way to communication the action with others. Always keep it simple. This is a concept that I learned from Jaani as I spent far to much time trying to figure out all these intimate details that were only making my understanding of disc golf worse and more frustrating.

However, I will hit the fucking table with a goddamned sledgehammer to try and pound the point of proper language is important while coaching in ANYTHING. Listening to people talk about disc golf swings is like listening to someone talk about how they are swinging arrows with a bow. That sounds like nonsense right? Cause the descriptors don't accurately describe the action. So why are people still continually using poor language to describe the actions of the swing?

However, the last 2 OT videos have bothered me a bit, even though I'm glad Josh is correcting and refining what he teaches.
I'm just going to copy paste this like through the rest of the replies here.
The issue people will have ick and cringe from Josh is because he is teaching as an authority when he's a student. People are literally listening to a first year college student talk about a complex subject like he's got a masters in the subject.

You might be "hard to like" at times, but at least you're open for ideas and discussing form.

To me, josh is all over the place and I do not like the way he's going lately.

Won't go on, cause I'll end up like sheep with a way to long rant that people won't read anyway... 😉 (I'm kidding)
I'm not sure if the "hard to like" was aimed at me, I'm guessing it was. And I'm around to discuss idea's and learn. I rarely aim my voice at a person in general, but Josh is unfortunately a really easy target as well. He's really big now for "coaching" but.. he's still a student masquerading as a coach. Were literally watching a guy develop his knowledge into disc golf form, but teaching the whole way and just correcting himself constantly as he figures out "oh shit, that wasn't right."

So it seems Josh has gone from 90/90 and Twirlybird drills, which assume inertial forces will produce the pocket and elbow forward positions as long as the body mechanics are correct, to teaching just the arm motions and the body will support.

I'm confused, somebody tell me who's right.

And, is this really the Beato drill?

The Beato drill is really really important for the extension into the hit. The problem is it's misunderstood by practically everyone, and misused by anyone who actually tries to practice it. I've spent a LOT of time thinking in the last year alone on how to shoot a video explaining how to properly use the beto drill. I'd rather put out my best content, vs "right now" content.

We have to accept the "out in out" style concept of the swing for starters for it to make sense. We have to then understand that the swing is a bit of both. We dont "pull", but we curl. We use our brace, an abrupt stop, to drive the hips to drive the rotation and start and BUILD the kinetic chain to the disc. The idea of "twirly bird" or the "noodle arm" is something I've been teaching for a long while. Why? Because it builds the foundation of what you need to do for good, clean, easy, low impact form. IT helps you learn to let the body flow and move. Then we can start adding sauce to it. We wanna build that natural chain, which we can by hitting the brakes and literally noodle arming the throw.
I mean, lets think about this really really hard. I mean easy.
A basic noodle arm technique throw will net you 300 feet with almost 0 effort.
While a "pull style" muscled mechanic will net you around 200-250 with insane amounts of energy used.
Which of those power chains is the best? The one that has you gassed after 5 throws, or the one you can do all day.

Then we can turn and look at pro players who effortlessly throw 200 feet with putters. Why? Because they are not muscling, they are building an efficient chain of energy.

So, is one way right or not? They are both right, when used properly at the correct time.
When we have built a good flowing form, we can add things to it like the beto drill to help ADD to the power. We always wanna follow the chain and accelerate it. When we perform any action that is a muscled action and not an additive action, we kill the chain and re-start it.



1. Josh will say that he works more from a "positional" or now "hybrid" or "amalgamator" perspective. He does now talk to many coaches and allows each of them to influence him, and likes to try out different ideas.
...
Josh looks at everyone and tries to grab things here and there, and knows that he is willing to try whatever he can to help someone improve regardless of its theory or source.

What I'm currently seeing is the one step forward 10 steps back with the way this is working.
It's feeling like he's trying to reach for a conclusion before understanding the material and studying it.
Some of these things I've settled on only half heartedly was after 2 years of studying the technique and gathering ALL the data I could to have some level of conclusion that I can defend my standpoint of.

So in turn, what I have continued to see happen over and over again from Josh is him teaching stuff he's still not yet understood, but teaching it as "the method." .. To which He's already had to back track on publicly at least once. Which was also funny, because some of that stuff was more accurate than this "advanced" stuff he's attempting to teach now.

This isn't in part because he wont talk to me either. That's a whatever at this point. It's his loss, not mine. How this community works together is just... disappointing to me. I love that in here we can talk, but you get outside of DGCR and its about subscribers, it's not about disc golf and coaching.

It's great that he's trying to think outside of the box and put his own plan together, but.. it just really feels like he's trying to also re-hash old theories and reinvent the wheel before he understands the topic.

2. He has some interest in a version of what people call a "pull," which also has some commonalities and direct influences from Taylor. I still talk to Josh about it, and he reports measurable differences in his own increased armspeed that IMO are part mechanics and part mentality/intent.

I think a bit of issue here is with the Tech disc and not enough study. It's a valuable tool and I think he's seeing that. But he's chasing a bit of data with his theories, not the practicality of the processes overall.
The problem with a device like this is you're doing what "feels" like scientific testing, but you are basically having a theory, and then having data, but the whole process of how to get there is practically lost because of how instantaneous the data is and how your getting it. Because you can cheat the data by ignoring the process.

I am not at all persuaded that you MUST arm the disc to get it to overtake the shoulders.

The arm will naturally overtake the shoulders. But if you try and bypass the chain by yanking the disc or pulling it at any point, you're overtaking the chain, vs adding to the chain. If we let the shoulder bring the disc into the pocket, we are now in a "null zone" where we can add to the chain. The pocket is where a LOT of the magic happens as the energy is basically wound up at that point and ready to explode out as we extend the arm. This is where you want to adjust to a deep pocket, the disc is on the far peck, we can tuck it in and really work on resisting the rotation and exploding out as we extend the arm into the swing. But this is all "help the power" stuff. Anytime someone talks in a method now that talks about arming the disc and yanking and pulling and whatever, all I wanna do is tell them to get bent and go pull their pudd and stop hurting the process that has been building and forming for a few years now as we try and understand it.
 
I think if I could ban the word 'pull' from discussing the backhand swing, I would do it. Maybe some people are using it in a way that I simply do not grasp, but I think it is one of the most potentially misleading concepts out there.

Personally I'm going to rate this new video as a gigantic yikes. He is basically describing one of my first wrong paths I went down conceptually lol. Holding the disc at 12'oclock (in relation to how some of us like to say 10'oclock, I know its a silly way to describe this)...donno man. Its a yikes from me.

This is the complaint I'm trying to make here. This is all old stuff. This stuff has all been retired and moved on to different ways.
This idea that we gotta keep re-inventing the wheel needs to stop and its getting annoying.

If you dont understand it enough to defend the topic, dont make a video on it and teach it as reality.

I've encountered people who have trouble with the progressive & smooth muscle activation who somehow seem to have more arm stuff going on and don't impede significantly fast throws. More often though it seems like people get musclebound in a way that backfires.

There are many ways to accelerate & still posturally collapse, and that in contrast you can jerk at the shoulder and avoid certain kinds of collapse. I have some shoulder wear and tear that became part of what told me which ones to keep and which ones to drop, players' mileage apparently varies. I'm going to be curious how certain people will look if they keep using certain ideas as they age.

A lot of the muscle activation issues comes from poor brain to muscle descriptors.
The action of throwing a frisbee like we do is really confusing to the body, even if you're athletic. Throwing a sidearm is pretty natural, but what we do to throw backhand is not very conceptually natural to anyone.

I honestly think there are definite ways to actually teach someone to do it with proper language and path that isn't full of drills and theory. The problem is, who's going to call me up as a coach and go "hey, i wanna learn to play disc golf, but I wanna learn the right way, I've never thrown a frisbee before, can you help?"
No, nobody is going to do that. They are going to come to me after trying for 2 or 3 months and not getting it. And essentially I could be getting a pinto with bad body damage, or I could be looking at a porche with a dinged quarter panel. You, at that point, have to ask them where they wanna go, build from scratch, or work out the dents and ask them how much bondo you want them to use. But they have already built bad muscle memory, they have already watched video's with bad descriptors and old school techniques we have mostly agreed are bad.

Such as me dealing with a local here who was throwing like turd the other night. I think I brought this one up already. He watched some old simon/eagle video and they were talking about the back swing and how you shouldn't swoop back. This is something that Sidewider, myself and brychanus as well as I'm pretty sure feldberg and everyone else teaches, its okay to swing the disc back into the pocket, its a really natural movement. You dont have to keep it on a straight line or walk it out.
Him trying to make this correction, for god knows whatever reason, the dude throws 450-500 after 2 years despite having no control. Like, why are you changing that? Cause a video told you to?

People get muscle bound because they essentially built a house before a foundation. I struggle with this all day. I rebuilt the foundation. I studied the plans, wrote new ones.
I practice, I get on the course, the house stays on the foundation for 2 or 3 holes, maybe 9 holes. Then it crashes and falls, because it wasn't built on the foundation from the start, and fixing those issues is hard.

For sure and Im all for getting weird with words. There have been some pretty strange phrases that actually dramatically impacted me here!

But this video is just talking a lot of nonsense, and then disproving a lot of what he says on his own when he does the actual drill at the end.

I get it. It is difficult to demonstrate the swing in static poses. But the idea of pulling through to that position 'where pros end up' above is not a helpful conceptualization if you ask me.

This is part of why I wish that all of us coaches talked far far far more than we do. I've been trying to hammer this language thing for 6 years now. I don't even care if I get credit for it. But we gotta all start getting on the same page with stuff if we want to promote coaching in this sport.

My goals are not the same as Brychanus for instance. He wants to study and understand to play better and help people. I wanna coach and understand how to coach better.
I wanna be able to walk up to a top 30 pro player and go "what do you need to get into the top 10?" And then help them. I wanna be able to look at an upcoming elite player thats 1000 rated and give them the tools to hit 1030 rounds.
But I also want to be able to help a new player enjoy and love this sport in a fashion that doesn't hurt their brain, where I can take a new player out for 1 or 2 lessons and they are playing above rec level, because I used good descriptors for the actions and helped their brain direct their body down the correct path.

I think Josh is a really good coach, in how he communicates concepts and (i suspect) how he works with people one on one. And confidently stating things as fact rather than letting your students see the doubts and nuance is not necessarily a bad thing.

But I'm definitely not in agreement on this new direction, nor on the way it's expressed. If you want to tell people to engage the arm in some way, I think 'arm the disc' is about the worst language he could have chosen (though it will certainly get the videos a high view count). Sure, many amateurs, regardless of their current form, are going to find some quick distance gains from going full send - but is that really a good way to improve longer term? And 'arm the disc', to me, sounds much more like 'throw hard' than 'engage the arm a bit to keep it in the right places'. 🤷‍♂️
Agreed.
This is going to encourage muscling again. This is something we've worked so hard to get rid of in the community if you ask me.

Lol yep. He has some decent videos and I'm not trying to just outright trash the guy but this particular video is so bad that it baffles me that he made it.

Again, its because a student is trying to write a masterclass on a subject.

I think you hit the nail on the head. A lot of coaches make it sound like they're right, but the mechanics of disc golf is still so new that we don't know for sure.

I do know that what Josh mentions and what you do above is that preventing shoulder collapse (rounding) is the key to throwing with proper form. It just seems that coaches aren't quite there yet with a way to stop rounding that's easily applied to most people. Or at least the light bulb isn't quite clicking in my head.

I think that we understand the mechanics overall a lot better than some feel. But people like Josh and Coach T (slinky) and a few others are trying WAY to hard to either re-invent the wheel, or possible bang square pegs in round holes.

I think if we we all, coaches, were trying to have proper discussions like this thread here vs this behind closed doors i'ma talk to who I want to that supports my theories so I don't have to defend my idea's..
Yeah, if we were having those discussions like we have here, then this coaching stuff would change.

People get mad at me for stuff, that's fine, but I'm attacking your idea's. The reason I turd on Josh is because I gave him the opportunity multiple times to communicate and discuss and learn. But regardless of the discussion, its about the idea and where can we take it.
The critical nature towards josh isn't because he's a bad coach. It's because he's a student acting as an authority of coaching. I think his ability to communicate and articulate are great. The problem comes from him not understanding the material before he teaches it. Because he's trying to re-invent the wheel.
 
If nothing else, that video triggered some good conversation.

TOL (thinking out loud) (and maybe completely wrong) If inertial forces should move the linkage components into more correct positions, they have to be large enough. Inertial forces depend on speed and mass. A beginner with a slow arm, and a light disc? Might be impossible.

So, options. 1) Increase the mass by throwing hammers. Has the same effect as a fast arm to produce the forces. 2) Manually use arm muscle to get the positions until the arm catches up. Might not actually use the kinetic chain but will look good. 3) Accept that slow arms are not going to have deep pockets. 90/90 and twirly are all you can get. (all I can get, I'm in the slow arm crowd)

Of course that neglects the another possibility - that arming the way Josh is now teaching it can actually work. It doesn't seem likely but I'm not sure it's really disproven; there might be more than one way to throw.
 
Of course that neglects the another possibility - that arming the way Josh is now teaching it can actually work. It doesn't seem likely but I'm not sure it's really disproven; there might be more than one way to throw.

It "is" a way to throw.
It's also why I've injured my shoulder multiple times before I decided I was going to study and figure out better ways to play this sport.
It's also why I keep accidentally hurting my shoulder still despite knowing better. Trying to get more, but doing it wrong.

And, while it doesn't help that I typed 2 novels.

Part of being a higher competency golfer and coach is understanding there is a line between the 2 that will create success. But I can guarantee you none of it ever starts with the "pull" or "arming" of the disc.

A vast majority of people throw this way. And that's fine. It was the way it was taught for years.
But when we really really look at it close, these really good players.
It's a reaction to their body that they add on to.

It's the whole action vs reaction thing again.
just like why everyone got into squish the bug.
It looks like that is the leading action, when its the effect of the leading action.
 
I don't know that we can completely strike the word "pull"out of disc golf vocabulary. It's just a matter of what part of your body are you using to pull. Obviously if you do what Josh is teaching that's wrong. But if you're using your body and body mass to pull the disc (like the doorframe drill), that's more on the right track. Your body still has to move the disc forward, and even though we might not like to use the word pull, it's still technically pulling to use your body to do it.
 
I don't know that we can completely strike the word "pull"out of disc golf vocabulary. It's just a matter of what part of your body are you using to pull. Obviously if you do what Josh is teaching that's wrong. But if you're using your body and body mass to pull the disc (like the doorframe drill), that's more on the right track. Your body still has to move the disc forward, and even though we might not like to use the word pull, it's still technically pulling to use your body to do it.

So, to just kinda devils advocate in weird ways.

So when we are "throwing" a baseball, when its back behind the shoulder, does that mean at that moment we are "pulling" it?
Or the same for a quarterback throwing the football, in the wind up, he's pulling it?

I think swing to throw is far more accurate.
The overall acts of "pulling" something are looking for a far different outcome than what we are trying to achieve with the discgolf swing/throw.
 
So, to just kinda devils advocate in weird ways.

So when we are "throwing" a baseball, when its back behind the shoulder, does that mean at that moment we are "pulling" it?
Or the same for a quarterback throwing the football, in the wind up, he's pulling it?

I think swing to throw is far more accurate.
The overall acts of "pulling" something are looking for a far different outcome than what we are trying to achieve with the discgolf swing/throw.
I wouldn't say throwing a baseball or football would be considered "pulling" the ball. But we're also not backhanding either of those things. I would never use the word pull to talk about forehand technic. The backhand is just so unnatural that we have to come up with words to describe feel. I'm fine with swing as well. It just takes a lot of force to initiate the throw (and it's not coming from your arm). It's "starting the lawnmower". And I would bet that you would call starting a lawnmower a pull.

And I'm not trying to argue with you or question your teaching techniques. Just wanting to point out some nuance to a diverse disc golf community that may call parts of a throw different things.
 
I wouldn't say throwing a baseball or football would be considered "pulling" the ball. But we're also not backhanding either of those things. I would never use the word pull to talk about forehand technic. The backhand is just so unnatural that we have to come up with words to describe feel. I'm fine with swing as well. It just takes a lot of force to initiate the throw (and it's not coming from your arm). It's "starting the lawnmower". And I would bet that you would call starting a lawnmower a pull.

And I'm not trying to argue with you or question your teaching techniques. Just wanting to point out some nuance to a diverse disc golf community that may call parts of a throw different things.
Hmm, what distinguishes these to concepts so clearly? Stand there and do a maximum sized dingle arm figure 8 with your lead arm using your body to shift and build momentum back and forth. Each direction basically mimics a portion of a BH of FH throw, and its fundamentally the same thing in each direction.
 
Hmm, what distinguishes these to concepts so clearly? Stand there and do a maximum sized dingle arm figure 8 with your lead arm using your body to shift and build momentum back and forth. Each direction basically mimics a portion of a BH of FH throw, and its fundamentally the same thing in each direction.
I'm not trying to say that they're necessarily distinctive or that we need to use the word "pull" or "swing". I'm just saying that being rigid in our vocabulary is doing something similar to what Josh is doing in his teaching. It's heading down the path of saying something is right or wrong when it isn't or might not be.
 
I wouldn't say throwing a baseball or football would be considered "pulling" the ball. But we're also not backhanding either of those things. I would never use the word pull to talk about forehand technic. The backhand is just so unnatural that we have to come up with words to describe feel. I'm fine with swing as well. It just takes a lot of force to initiate the throw (and it's not coming from your arm). It's "starting the lawnmower". And I would bet that you would call starting a lawnmower a pull.

And I'm not trying to argue with you or question your teaching techniques. Just wanting to point out some nuance to a diverse disc golf community that may call parts of a throw different things.

Not taking it as an argument against me at all. Just trying to promote healthy discussion. I think its great to break these things down and discuss them and further all of our knowledge. And it's others in here with alternating opinions that help make that awesome. If everyone agrees on everything, it doesn't further any discussion whatsoever.

And yes. We "pull" the cord to start a lawnmower.
I also have never been fond of the "start the lawnmower" analogy for disc golf either.

Mainly because the pull has an end to the pull. and while we also use the body to pull on the lawnmower, we are pulling only then stopping.

With disc golf, when we use "pull" people just yank their arm forwards towards the goal, but.. half way through, the pull action finishes and starts a different action.
The problem I have with "pull" as well is that the descriptor turns it into an "arm" movement, with a body as passive backup. While we weight shift, the weight shift is rarely the driving force of the action, it's the passive balance it provides to assist in the "pulling of the cord."

However, what the body does gives the right appearance to where we want to start the swing for disc golf, because we pull back the cord, then the body braces to resist the force and assist in the movement.

While in disc golf, we wanna brace and build energy through the whole body. Any level of "pulling" is an "assist" task at that moment with the muscle groups, not a driving task. And that's why I hate it.
We can lag behind the swing with the curl motion to assist the kinetic chain adding on to the whole chain.
The problem is, our brain really sucks at doing this when we say "pull" because you start to yank to try and start the motion, vs assist the motion. We have to remember to basically work with the kinetic chain we are building. And when we turn assisting or passive actions into direct actions, we can destroy the chain.

Part of the struggle with finding ways to figure this stuff out is we can find similiar actions in other stuff that show us what we need to do, but it's also hard to remember to see that its an analogy to the overall picture, not the causation to the action as a whole.

So, for me to teach something like a brace, if I really wanted to teach how to brace and resist rotation. I hand someone a 6 foot 2x4 and say "here, throw this underhand with both hands."

You HAVE to brace to throw it. But that also doesn't help us with the upper body, but it does let us feel the brace.
 
I'm not trying to say that they're necessarily distinctive or that we need to use the word "pull" or "swing". I'm just saying that being rigid in our vocabulary is doing something similar to what Josh is doing in his teaching. It's heading down the path of saying something is right or wrong when it isn't or might not be.

The argument really is trying to find better words to teach with, vs just using the old incorrect vernacular that has been used for years, then trying to shoe horn that teaching in by having to spend an hour explaining what "pull" means, vs just using better language to start with.

I have legit re-explained the swing to someone without any visual aids or lessons and immediately gotten results with them because I used language to trigger their brain to stop trying to "pull" the throw. And think of it as a swing and a dance.

Our body has to learn by doing, but if it doesn't know what to do, it gets confused especially if we use poor language.

But we know for certain that a majority of players can throw better when you get them to slow down and stop trying so hard, and suddenly their distance jumps 50 feet or more.
They let their body sign and stop trying to force the throw, and let the body act more naturally not pulling and jerking things around.

We all here have felt it. It generally happens when we round. the disc comes out like a wombat on attack mode.
Especially when you are trying to throw touch shots. we let the body flow vs trying to drive it so hard with aggressive movements.
Our bodies know what to do when we give it good direction and stop trying to drive the wheel at 10 and 2.

The best way I can explain it is healthy fundamentals, and 2 fingers on the wheel. All you wanna do is provide subtle suggestions to the direction your driving and let your body do the rest. It's an amazing thing when we stop trying to be in control and start letting the motor cortex take the wheel, while we provide subtle suggestions.
But the timing of those suggestions are truly the advanced part of throwing far and powerfully. Not everyone has absolute command of their fast twitch muscles. And that's what lets you add the sauce to the equation. Assisting the whole body and adding sauce at the right times.

I know its all over the map with what I'm explaining here.
And I just got a phone call and lost my train of thought...

I think I was going somewhere with Pull being more of a "forced" method, vs a natural method.

I wont deny that you cannot play like that. But from a health standpoint and longevity in the throw, energy used, etc. I think our brains don't work with it as well as it could be.
I think the goal of a lot of discussions should be to acknowledge "yes, it works, even though its probably not a great idea."
Because there are a LOT of bad ways to play disc golf.

But if we want to keep the goalposts at "learning to play healthy, safely and well" then we need to write some of these concepts into the "Yeah it works, but its a dumb way to do it" box.
 
I definitely agree with not being rigid in the discussion :)

I will say that 'pulling a lawnmower cord' is one of the things that I personally think is a horrible example. There are aspects of that action that can apply, but it is way too easy to get a very wrong idea. Throwing the whole lawn mower is, oddly, a far better concept to embrace imo.
 
Curious where this goes, I really don't think my opinion matters much, since my knowledge in coaching and biomechanics are next to zero.

What he demonstrates with the 3 part drills, sure as hell isn't how he throws in the ending. It sure as hell isn't how many pro's throws. He shows it as a straight pull/swing (6 to 12 in lack of better terms) or did I miss something?

Will this drill reasonate and yield better form for the Average viewer? (250-300 range, my guesstimate) I got no clue.
 
a few observations:
-i have not found a fool-proof way of teaching this, but at the same time i don't think i can make the majority of it any easier than i already have. this is partly because timing is difficult and i think largely because people are unwilling/unable to "let go" of their old throw when trying to do any of this. some players techniques are "close enough" to ideal where adding a few focal points can get them "there." for most, this is basically a rebuild from the ground up. the pace of the shoulders is really being the most difficult culprit to correct... while oddly enough, i developed this technique with helping bring the shoulder speed under control as one of its primary benefits.

dual stage shoulder rotation. there are definitely two distinct rotations... and not one continuous "spin." the first rotation generates momentum to reach the point of impact. the second rotation happens as you unload from the power pocket. if you can't separate these, it's next to impossible to snap a disc.
I am hoping Josh's drill is an extreme way to teach the shoulder pause that is needed to break past the 350-375 barrier. This is where BlakeT got stuck when he was trying to teach the "Incomplete Secret Technique". Most of his students were over-rotating their shoulders and it was a tough habit to break.
 
Curious where this goes, I really don't think my opinion matters much, since my knowledge in coaching and biomechanics are next to zero.

Entirely untrue, and that's what makes this place great.

Your perspective is what helps coaches teach better, if they are willing to listen and communicate with you.

There are reasons for it. You not understanding can help me or other solidify our philosophy by learning to explain it better. And if its off, you're hopefully going to continue to ask questions.

Secondly, your eyes and brain are not focused on the things that we are, so there is a chance you see something we don't because you're mind isn't geared the same way.
 
Top