Forming the whip by Overthrow Disc Golf

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?

That's why I was banging on so hard about trying to re-invent the wheel and teach things we already know are not correct.

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.

Interesting, I'm unfamiliar with this.
Is there a better place to read on this one?

I mean...lol. I can see how it seems like a ridiculous comparison but I don't honestly think it is.

It's not, its why I use the 2x4 analogy. and some other weird ones. because it's a throw, not a pull, your body acts differently.
 
Interesting, I'm unfamiliar with this.
Is there a better place to read on this one?
 
Did they finally return the dgr mirror to the site or is it still gone?
 

I really really feel like something is missing from that thread..
Because I see him talking about doing it, but not the actual drills/writeup. Though he mentions he needs to do the write up. Like that was the teaser thing or something.
 


I'ma roll in this form check I had sent in. This is why we shouldn't say "pull."

He sets up pretty fair, then just tosses everything out the window as he moves to muscling and pulling the disc...

Then the off arm thing... not sure there. I did it probably when i started too so whatever.

But the "pulling" and muscling has put his elbow low, and his drive arm trap is scrunched up as he tries to throw the disc.

This is also why I don't like the term throw as a descriptor, even though it's fairly accurate to the result of the action vs swing. I like swing because it's a better descriptor of body usage.
 
I really really feel like something is missing from that thread..
Because I see him talking about doing it, but not the actual drills/writeup. Though he mentions he needs to do the write up. Like that was the teaser thing or something.
Yeah, he disappeared after that and DGR was overtaken by bots. Here is the preceding thread which had links to the hammer pound drills:
 


I'ma roll in this form check I had sent in. This is why we shouldn't say "pull."

He sets up pretty fair, then just tosses everything out the window as he moves to muscling and pulling the disc...

Then the off arm thing... not sure there. I did it probably when i started too so whatever.

But the "pulling" and muscling has put his elbow low, and his drive arm trap is scrunched up as he tries to throw the disc.

This is also why I don't like the term throw as a descriptor, even though it's fairly accurate to the result of the action vs swing. I like swing because it's a better descriptor of body usage.

His form looks better than mine, but I also notice the similarity with my form in that his throwing shoulder comes up, and his elbow comes down. I can attest that likely came from being taught to "pull" like I taught myself. I started throwing like I was pulling a lawnmower string. The problem is, I mowed a lot of lawns over the decades, and it's _not_ like swinging a disc. For one thing the elbow has to come down to really get after it, and the shoulder invariably comes up. When applied to a throw, the disc does some weird stuff in the swing, and I'm still working on this issue to this day because my body absolutely wants to rotate my arm even if I try to minimize arm action as much as possible. I think that young man will have a much easier time getting out of that trap.
 


I'ma roll in this form check I had sent in. This is why we shouldn't say "pull."

He sets up pretty fair, then just tosses everything out the window as he moves to muscling and pulling the disc...

Then the off arm thing... not sure there. I did it probably when i started too so whatever.

But the "pulling" and muscling has put his elbow low, and his drive arm trap is scrunched up as he tries to throw the disc.

This is also why I don't like the term throw as a descriptor, even though it's fairly accurate to the result of the action vs swing. I like swing because it's a better descriptor of body usage.

Curious what your thoughts are about your body if you aren't "pulling". Does swinging mean that your upper body needs to rotate with force from the brace? I hear linear vs rotational arguments all the time, but is it a combination of both? Linear weight shift leading to rotation and torque in the upper body?
 
Curious what your thoughts are about your body if you aren't "pulling". Does swinging mean that your upper body needs to rotate with force from the brace? I hear linear vs rotational arguments all the time, but is it a combination of both? Linear weight shift leading to rotation and torque in the upper body?

In a nutshell yeah.

If you load your body and brace, your body HAS to go somewhere, so it will crash through.

Give it enough guidance to not collapse, but let go of control.

You gotta help guide into the pocket for instance.

But you also gotta help keep yourself from spinning out, we don't wanna spin and throw.

letting go and letting the body actually just do natural stuff is really interesting.
It's a hard concept though, because you wanna take control. But if you just brace and resist the rotation. your body will unload with a LOT of power if you coiled well.

All the stuff after that is learning to just do it more efficiently and learning to help the body become more powerful without getting in the way.

I do know and believe you can throw really well and powerful with a lot of muscles and umpf and blah blah.
"pulling" and "yanking" and.. jerking each other off, i dont fucking know.
You can do it a few different ways. But. I am trying to approach it in a way where we use as much of the body in the swing to spread the load across groups.

The hard part of all of it is I need "new" "new" students to work with too in person. And.. You generally get "iv'e played for 6 months and have tons of bad habbits already" students in person.
Then of course I get the perfect candidate in a form check yesterday. doh.
 
Curious what your thoughts are about your body if you aren't "pulling". Does swinging mean that your upper body needs to rotate with force from the brace? I hear linear vs rotational arguments all the time, but is it a combination of both? Linear weight shift leading to rotation and torque in the upper body?
I don't think there are too many arguments about whether rotation occurs in the swing. People (correctly) argue that rotation is not the goal of the swing, or is not the primary power engine.

If you already kind of get it, then I can see how that whole discussion is a little bit odd sounding. If you do NOT get it, and try to mimic what good throwers appear to be doing, it is very easy to go down the wrong path. Some pros even describe their own swing as forcing a rotation (Gibson and the whole spin my belt buckle thing).

The lateral shift being the main power source is something that people can get fundamentally wrong so some people have spent time really hashing out why that is not the right idea.
 
I don't think there are too many arguments about whether rotation occurs in the swing. People (correctly) argue that rotation is not the goal of the swing, or is not the primary power engine.

If you already kind of get it, then I can see how that whole discussion is a little bit odd sounding. If you do NOT get it, and try to mimic what good throwers appear to be doing, it is very easy to go down the wrong path. Some pros even describe their own swing as forcing a rotation (Gibson and the whole spin my belt buckle thing).

The lateral shift being the main power source is something that people can get fundamentally wrong so some people have spent time really hashing out why that is not the right idea.

You can see this with new players trying to mimic those who can swing.

They are trying to rotate weird and flick the disk with their wrist a weird way and it just looks like a cow that put high heels on and is falling all over the place.

The body needs directions to understand things in the simple way. And.. most actions out there are fairly easy to mimic, but.. yeah. Disc golf, no. It's practical when you understand it, but. impractical if you dont have enough knowledge.

And it's a really unique motion in a way as well, because we are trying to drive linear motion into rotational motion, then resist the rotational motion turning it back into linear motion to drive it into leverage.

That's how it works in my brain.
Cause were trying to transfer energy from the ground into our arm to resist against it in a way that it drives the power up into a rotation again that has resistance and.
It's really simple when you think about it.
But really complicated in practice.

And, like.. Brychanus is the only one who seems to have enough discipline to go in the basement and essentially do build up drills.

I was thinking about it... last night or this morning. Maybe while I was sleeping, I duno.
Like I really wanna build my swing out proper by breaking it down and building it up.

The problem is I'm trying to develop my own way of teaching it as well that makes it easy for me to understand and provide drills that make sense to people I can quickly teach in lessons, or put up video clips that help people get there.

So, I could spent 500 reps on something and then try and build it into the next part, and it's just not bringing the results I need. Now I gotta do 2000 reps to build a new one and wipe out the old one.

Which ... if you listen to me complain, I talk about people not putting in the time. And.. I'm not necessarily wrong, but I don't practice it either. because it's hard to spend a week on 1 or 2 things to try and gain a practical understanding. I'm not necessarily trying to do it to build muscle memory. its very frustrating. Especially with my broken body.
 
I don't think there are too many arguments about whether rotation occurs in the swing. People (correctly) argue that rotation is not the goal of the swing, or is not the primary power engine.

If you already kind of get it, then I can see how that whole discussion is a little bit odd sounding. If you do NOT get it, and try to mimic what good throwers appear to be doing, it is very easy to go down the wrong path. Some pros even describe their own swing as forcing a rotation (Gibson and the whole spin my belt buckle thing).

The lateral shift being the main power source is something that people can get fundamentally wrong so some people have spent time really hashing out why that is not the right idea.
I'm just confused on what the goal of the swing is then. Because your lower body is not directly powering up the disc. It needs to power up something else, to power something else, to power something else, etc. What is imparting the force in the disc directly? And does powering up that piece through the kinetic chain make you throw farther? I can weight shift my hips all day and that momentum could never make it in the disc. Are we trying to build arm speed or arm power? Or some sort of combination of both that's hard to explain? Disc golf form still seems like an enigmatic box at this point in the sport. Will be interesting to see what happens over the next decade.
 
I don't think the lower body has to power anything up in the throw. I mean, it does in the weight shift or walk up, but when it comes to the throw itself it's more a case of each part of the body stopping, and then the next bit pivots around it (and, simply by pivoting around it, speeds up - this is just what levers do. Stop one end, allow the middle bit to carry on at the same speed, and the other end of the lever must be travelling faster than before. If you have a bunch of levers acting one after another, you can get surprising speed out of the other end ).

That's a huge oversimplification, but it's more fruitful IMO than thinking about how to actively transfer power. Transferring momentum is what your levers are already good at, even if we had no muscles at all.

All we have to do is get them in a good starting position, with a bit of momentum already present (from a weight shift or walk up) in the more massive parts of our body, and let leverage (and possibly a bit of gravity, depending on the throwing style) do the work.
 
I'm just confused on what the goal of the swing is then. Because your lower body is not directly powering up the disc. It needs to power up something else, to power something else, to power something else, etc. What is imparting the force in the disc directly? And does powering up that piece through the kinetic chain make you throw farther? I can weight shift my hips all day and that momentum could never make it in the disc. Are we trying to build arm speed or arm power? Or some sort of combination of both that's hard to explain? Disc golf form still seems like an enigmatic box at this point in the sport. Will be interesting to see what happens over the next decade.
It's a simply complicated thing.

The actual simplicity of it is pretty mind boggling, and that's probably why you're struggling to comprehend. Because you'd say "oh that can't possibly be the solution."

The most simplified way of it is using as many muscles at one time to create a kinetic chain to power the disc.

It's like the amish building moving thing. They got like 300 guys carrying a barn.
If you're using 300 muscles vs 4 muscles...
Which one is going to work better?

It's a tad more complicated than that, but in the main reality of things, its not.

It's leverage and applied forces through a kinetc chain.
 
I don't think the lower body has to power anything up in the throw. I mean, it does in the weight shift or walk up, but when it comes to the throw itself it's more a case of each part of the body stopping, and then the next bit pivots around it (and, simply by pivoting around it, speeds up - this is just what levers do. Stop one end, allow the middle bit to carry on at the same speed, and the other end of the lever must be travelling faster than before. If you have a bunch of levers acting one after another, you can get surprising speed out of the other end ).

That's a huge oversimplification, but it's more fruitful IMO than thinking about how to actively transfer power. Transferring momentum is what your levers are already good at, even if we had no muscles at all.

All we have to do is get them in a good starting position, with a bit of momentum already present (from a weight shift or walk up) in the more massive parts of our body, and let leverage (and possibly a bit of gravity, depending on the throwing style) do the work.

I wouldn't say stopping.
Because we don't wanna jerk and stop. That's bad.

We wanna drive and resist.

Resisting is the important part that a lot of people overlook. When the motion is finished in the chain, it has to resist the forces then at that point, So your lower body, the rear leg resists the rotation, because we need equal and opposite reactions to fight against each other.
The off arm, it has to resist the rotation, so we have something to push out against to drive the disc.

Were just building and storing energy. So you're not necessarily wrong, but its how efficiently we do it is what makes it look so effortless or horrific.


But good starting position is always the key. Your base has to be good. Your backswing has to be good. your body posture has to be good. The other thing that is forgotten by most of these youtube "coaches" is the body posture has to be good, FOR YOU AND YOUR BODY. Not everyone bends and moves the same. but they want to keep always forcing people into some box or something. Ugh.
 
Yeah, i agree that 'stopping' is overdoing it somewhat. An oversimplification. I'd probably say 'decelerate' rather than 'resist' as it fits my mental model of the throw better, but i get what you're saying and i don't disagree.

If we decelerate one end of a moving lever (which has mass and inertia), the other end will accelerate. That to me is fundamental to what's going on.

If anyone is struggling to picture why the other end accelerates, imagine a stick that is stationary but vertical, just hanging in space. If we push the middle of it to the left, the whole thing moves left. But if we push the bottom of it to the left, applying a force away from the centre of gravity, inertia tries to keep the centre of gravity in the same place, and so it rotates from 'I' to '/'. In pushing the bottom of it left, we cause the top to move to the right.

If we then imagine the whole stick was moving before we started, going from left to right, then the force we apply at the bottom is a deceleration rather than actually a push to the left, and the rightward motion of the top that results from it is an acceleration. And if that top end is connected to the next lever, it will pull on that next lever. And so on through a bunch of levers down the whole chain.

This, for me, is the fundamental reason we have rotational elements when transferring linear momentum down the chain. Rotation of a succession of levers is how the momentum is transferred from one to the next.

Rotation isn't the goal of a throw, and actively rotating beyond the point that you're usefully accelerating the next lever is unhelpful. Similarly, actively rotating a lever too early, before it gets rotated naturally in the chain, is unhelpful. But rotation is nevertheless crucial to how the throw works.
 
Yeah, i agree that 'stopping' is overdoing it somewhat. An oversimplification. I'd probably say 'decelerate' rather than 'resist' as it fits my mental model of the throw better, but i get what you're saying and i don't disagree.

If we decelerate one end of a moving lever (which has mass and inertia), the other end will accelerate. That to me is fundamental to what's going on.

If anyone is struggling to picture why the other end accelerates, imagine a stick that is stationary but vertical, just hanging in space. If we push the middle of it to the left, the whole thing moves left. But if we push the bottom of it to the left, applying a force away from the centre of gravity, inertia tries to keep the centre of gravity in the same place, and so it rotates from 'I' to '/'. In pushing the bottom of it left, we cause the top to move to the right.

If we then imagine the whole stick was moving before we started, going from left to right, then the force we apply at the bottom is a deceleration rather than actually a push to the left, and the rightward motion of the top that results from it is an acceleration. And if that top end is connected to the next lever, it will pull on that next lever. And so on through a bunch of levers down the whole chain.

This, for me, is the fundamental reason we have rotational elements when transferring linear momentum down the chain. Rotation of a succession of levers is how the momentum is transferred from one to the next.

Rotation isn't the goal of a throw, and actively rotating beyond the point that you're usefully accelerating the next lever is unhelpful. Similarly, actively rotating a lever too early, before it gets rotated naturally in the chain, is unhelpful. But rotation is nevertheless crucial to how the throw works.

I can't say I like "decelerate" as a term.
Because.. that's not accurate to what is actually happening in the reaction chain.

But I can see how you're applying the term.

Either way, its an equal and opposite reaction scenario.
 


Update from OT

Lol this guy. Pretty much the embodiment of why people get stuck learning this swing.

"I did a thing and it made me throw really far! I was bombing!....for me".

Extrapolating acute personal gains into a notion that you are onto some secret is such a trap. Making videos about doing it is guaranteed to be a series of things you are going to be embarrassed about ever saying. This guy's fanbase must be pretty uniquely positioned to not catch on.

I can respect people who at least realize they were wrong about something. But it seems like being a 'youtube influencer' means you can't actually take the proper time to resolve this issue because you have to keep pumping out videos whether you know wtf you are talking about or not lol.
 

Latest posts

Top