Tech disc test driven development

Like another butt-on view? Or rear of tee?
Rear of tee.

I want to chart his brace step path as he brings it over his x step foot before swinging it lot wide.

i've noticed while working on rear hip coil that it makes me want to brace more north Westward instead of totally linear momentum into a northward brace.

I tested bracing out wider before, but it was before I was thinking about it more as a natural consequence of rear hip coil plus rear leg drive guiding the weight shift out wider.

After feeling that interaction, it felt like it made sense to weight shift more Eastwood on my x step to have more time to balance while rear hip coiling.

So I focused today I focused on trying to put those things together, thinking of a linear run up line, but having my weight shift curve a little east of the line during x step then curve a bit more westward into brace.

Almost hit 70, 69 twice and a few easy 66-68 mph. Not sure if it was camera angle or not, but the disc looked it had a more dramatic redirect out of my pocket as well.

I exaggerated the eastward weight shift into the X step a little too much probably and so then my brace looked like it was linear, but offset normally, but there definitely was more Westward weight shift into the brace because of the preceding more than usual eastward weight shift.

I feel like this is kinda like what Simon is doing, does that track for you?

Do you have a name for this weight shift / balance pattern. Trying to think of what to call it.

Throw vid uploaded in this reply: Tech disc test driven development
 
Last edited:
Vid didn't upload before, this is a 66 that felt much easier than usual.

Right knee extension as I X step is kicking weight back over on top of the X step more than I usually do.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2306.mov
    26.9 MB
Rear of tee.

I want to chart his brace step path as he brings it over his x step foot before swinging it lot wide.

i've noticed while working on rear hip coil that it makes me want to brace more north Westward instead of totally linear momentum into a northward brace.

I tested bracing out wider before, but it was before I was thinking about it more as a natural consequence of rear hip coil plus rear leg drive guiding the weight shift out wider.

After feeling that interaction, it felt like it made sense to weight shift more Eastwood on my x step to have more time to balance while rear hip coiling.

So I focused today I focused on trying to put those things together, thinking of a linear run up line, but having my weight shift curve a little east of the line during x step then curve a bit more westward into brace.

Almost hit 70, 69 twice and a few easy 66-68 mph. Not sure if it was camera angle or not, but the disc looked it had a more dramatic redirect out of my pocket as well.

I exaggerated the eastward weight shift into the X step a little too much probably and so then my brace looked like it was linear, but offset normally, but there definitely was more Westward weight shift into the brace because of the preceding more than usual eastward weight shift.

I feel like this is kinda like what Simon is doing, does that track for you?

Do you have a name for this weight shift / balance pattern. Trying to think of what to call it.

Throw vid uploaded in this reply: Tech disc test driven development
Yeah I follow generally and nice to hear you've got some gas going for you!

I'll try to find a good rear of tee full crush.

Maybe this is a good time to throw this at you. Sidewinder called the same/similar concept you're after the "zig zag x step", which in a way I tend to see at least a majority of pros use to a greater or lesser extent. However, there is a bit of a theoretical debate about this still out there.

The zig zag x step involves the N-S and W-E strides, but it is not only that. The concept is the difference between just focusing on the strides themselves and kind of trying to force the body to be literally centered in space between the feet (which actually means your body mass is slightly trapped) versus the balance and theoretical center of mass shifting from foot to foot tilting each way. This was controversial around here at one point. I am aware people still disagree about it. I have tried both.

This will either confuse or help: if you want a version that encodes the CoM concept, I am working on learning something close to GG's [1 2]. Simon's and specifically his transition move the step before the x step ("prep step") onward is probably one of the most sophisticated out there but you might be able to pull a version of it off with your body type. I think there's a reason a fair number of top throwers try to copy Simon to good effect. A version of GG's probably works better for me because of how I am shaped, but then again Paige Pierce uses a version of GG's pattern so I don't think it's just for husky people. GGs is just using maybe more mass/countermass dynamics to generate power than maybe anyone else I've stared at long enough so far.

SW had been trying to get me to do it for more than a year but the "trick" was that I needed the step before the xstep to "toss" my whole mass more east, then the whole thing kind of just works together if the balanced axis and posture are decent. But it took me a few months walking away from it before something new clicked for whatever reason when I watched GG throwing more flat (which his motion is unmistakably not when throwing at or near that plane). Before, I was mostly just looking at the strides and feet. I wasn't seeing or feeling the "mass toss" part of the zig zag/CoM movement. This is 100% clear in my head and body but lmk if I am failing in words lmao.

Anyway, in your throw there I can do a markup when I get to my main comp, but what you will see is that the "hang time" you spend over the rear leg transition is a little long because you've still got opportunities to improve your tilted axis of balance a bit. That's related to the "swivel stairs" action sidewinder shows in that drill or the hallway sideways run, Simon's is just better than perhaps anyone else's from a certain theoretical perspective. I suspect you will also have the chance to get a little more internal (good) torque there as part of the coil and a couple more mph if you can get it.

I will mention that other concepts de-emphasize the role of internal torque in the context of a relatively short plant stride and role of moving CoM and force redirection in favor of maximal plant stride and abrupt stop of mass favoring horizontal abduction. The latter can also work in terms of generating power. The distinction in some ways summarizes the difference in two major schools of thought about the entire move. I personally learn from examples more like Simon, Eagle, and GG for theoretical and practical reasons and moved back to them after exploring a bit on my own. Just wanted to acknowledge certain debates there that often happen too privately or too abruptly in my humble opinion.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I follow generally and nice to hear you've got some gas going for you!

I'll try to find a good rear of tee full crush.

Maybe this is a good time to throw this at you. Sidewinder called the same/similar concept you're after the "zig zag x step", which in a way I tend to see at least a majority of pros use to a greater or lesser extent. However, there is a bit of a theoretical debate about this still out there.

The zig zag x step involves the N-S and W-E strides, but it is not only that. The concept is the difference between just focusing on the strides themselves and kind of trying to force the body to be literally centered in space between the feet (which actually means your body mass is slightly trapped) versus the balance and theoretical center of mass shifting from foot to foot tilting each way. This was controversial around here at one point. I am aware people still disagree about it. I have tried both.

This will either confuse or help: if you want a version that encodes the CoM concept, I am working on learning something close to GG's [1 2]. Simon's and specifically his transition move the step before the x step ("prep step") onward is probably one of the most sophisticated out there but you might be able to pull a version of it off with your body type. I think there's a reason a fair number of top throwers try to copy Simon to good effect. A version of GG's probably works better for me because of how I am shaped, but then again Paige Pierce uses a version of GG's pattern so I don't think it's just for husky people. GGs is just using maybe more mass/countermass dynamics to generate power than maybe anyone else I've stared at long enough so far.

SW had been trying to get me to do it for more than a year but the "trick" was that I needed the step before the xstep to "toss" my whole mass more east, then the whole thing kind of just works together if the balanced axis and posture are decent. But it took me a few months walking away from it before something new clicked for whatever reason when I watched GG throwing more flat (which his motion is unmistakably not when throwing at or near that plane). Before, I was mostly just looking at the strides and feet. I wasn't seeing or feeling the "mass toss" part of the zig zag/CoM movement. This is 100% clear in my head and body but lmk if I am failing in words lmao.

Anyway, in your throw there I can do a markup when I get to my main comp, but what you will see is that the "hang time" you spend over the rear leg transition is a little long because you've still got opportunities to improve your tilted axis of balance a bit. That's related to the "swivel stairs" action sidewinder shows in that drill or the hallway sideways run, Simon's is just better than perhaps anyone else's from a certain theoretical perspective. I suspect you will also have the chance to get a little more internal (good) torque there as part of the coil and a couple more mph if you can get it.

I will mention that other concepts de-emphasize the role of internal torque in the context of a relatively short plant stride and role of moving CoM and force redirection in favor of maximal plant stride and abrupt stop of mass favoring horizontal abduction. The latter can also work in terms of generating power. The distinction in some ways summarizes the difference in two major schools of thought about the entire move. I personally learn from examples more like Simon, Eagle, and GG for theoretical and practical reasons and moved back to them after exploring a bit on my own. Just wanted to acknowledge certain debates there that often happen too privately or too abruptly in my humble opinion.

Cool, thanks.

Zig zag is too rigid / sharp angle-sounding to me. I'm calling it "curvy runup weight shift" I guess, lmao..

When I started crow hopping I lost some of the wider brace look, but, it still felt wider even when it looked like a more linear brace path because I still had my weight shifted more east over my X step which changed how wide the brace felt and how the weight shift into it felt.

Also, I didn't try this, but, having the lead foot more open like Simon does as he is going into the x step seems to automatically direct your weight a little bit more east over your x step as you press off the lead knee into the x step.

There are timestamps if you want to skip to the throws.

 
Last edited:
Too rigid? lol C'mon man, you in here talking about diagonals yourself.

If you focus on the force/pressure it's zig zag or diagonals as forces are straight. The resulting motion/torque is circular or figure 8.

I agree with your video and you need to do more of what I'm talking about with the inward kick.

Voigt zig zag.png
 
Last edited:
Cool, thanks.

Zig zag is too rigid / sharp angle-sounding to me. I'm calling it "curvy runup weight shift" I guess, lmao..

When I started crow hopping I lost some of the wider brace look, but, it still felt wider even when it looked like a more linear brace path because I still had my weight shifted more east over my X step which changed how wide the brace felt and how the weight shift into it felt.

Also, I didn't try this, but, having the lead foot more open like Simon does as he is going into the x step seems to automatically direct your weight a little bit more east over your x step as you press off the lead knee into the x step.

There are timestamps if you want to skip to the throws.


You theoretically can do the same move without hopping more like Simon - though note that Simon's version just still nearly deweights him briefly just as he's coming into and off of the prep step.

I agree that the actual net dynamic is quite curvy and should look and function very organically (which is difficult for most people).

SW's summary of the force interactions here was easier for me to think about after I started making some progress with the "mass toss" and the little markups I did show a version of the vectors of the CoM drift, but those are a result of the process below too mediated through the body and its posture. When I was trying to force it with just the legs I was missing parts of the rest of the dynamic (and getting slightly more hurt).

For you Neil, I also observe that working on the inward kick might be the next step. I would exaggerate it a bit past what you think it should be and see if it settles down. Should eventually be able to exaggerate it in the live throw, double dragon, and kick the can fluently. Feels cool. Functions well.

Too rigid? lol C'mon man, you in here talking about diagonals yourself.

If you focus on the force/pressure it's zig zag or diagonals as forces are straight. The resulting motion/torque is circular or figure 8.

I agree with your video and you need to do more of what I'm talking about with the inward kick.

View attachment 356942


Edit: I watched your progression again, @disc-golf-neil

I'll start with words but could switch to visuals if it's not communicated well here.

Your move off the front foot in the "prep" step (my arbitrary name for the step before x-step) reveals that you tend to put pressure through the quads - the knee shifts forward significantly toward/over the toes. The quads do put in work, but you don't generally want that potential shear force in that direction. But that's an effect, so what causes it?

If you backtrack that process to the step before it, or the transition in the x-step and backswing/reachback, you'll notice that your hip really opens more like a circle in the W-E dimension than does Simon's. We can call that an incomplete Figure 8. To compensate you need to tip your overall axis of balance "back" toward north overall, which you do a bit - ideally you want to fix the balance and coil dynamic through the rear side to avoid the need to compensate like that.

So, as it is now, heading into the plant, your weight is shifting back NW with your CoM, but the problem is that you're not completely getting into the internal rotation phase of the rear hip during the backswing/reachback before external rotation shifting forward. The Open-to-Closed drill specifically exaggerates this internal rotation part in Sidewinder's crush the can series during the coil back before switching to external rotation in the rear hip shifting forward. Another way to say it is that your backswing is still "over the top" of your rear hip rather than "coiled into it."

Doing it in Simon's move is on a more extreme overall tilted balance in each cardinal direction than even most other pros which makes it harder, but it is possible if you can access what I am describing. Sidewinder tends to teach it in a more upright but still athletic posture first to get the internal rotation phase before shifting forward (in my experience this is in like the top 5 most common mechanical problems out there for one reason or another). It usually takes additional work to get it functioning with the feet moving - e.g., I couldn't do it at all until I figured out my mass toss suddenly "clicked", but that was after I had gone through lots of other learning. Learning paths will vary. Some people never get it.

One thing that has/is helping me while I learn in this framework is by studying GG. As he supinates into the backswing, notice that he also lets the disc and his arm come even further inside his posture (appearing "behind") him. For me, this also helps encourage the rear side action involving the balance and hip I'm describing above. When viewed directly side by side with GG, Simon actually does this too but is slightly more out-in-out in the upper body/arm action relative to his upper body and countering his lower body action, which is why I generally describe it as more "complex" and might be part of why it's hard to learn. But for both players, this is the internal torque part of the process I used to partly misunderstand and people still disagree about (in my humble opinion, I think probably unnecessarily at this point). I don't have exactly the full mash image I'm still looking for, but if you can decode what I am describing in the paragraph I am ending now when you see these two throws, you are starting to see what I am trying to get you to see:

ViqHhv3.gif


This next image nicely isolates the GG backswing/reachback "behind" him action - it is still "inside his posture" though which you can see based on how the disc is framed by his chest. Notice our rear foot discussion here again too relative to the overall action of the move, and how the backswing relates to his lower body and especially rear hip in this image and various throws.
hL0O30E.png

I use a less complex version of GG's - two difrerences are that I use a pendulum as I add power and my rear leg can't support good W-E action (due to prior injury). But the torque process is present in the motion pattern involving the backswing in the x step. A critical difference between GG and my action overall is that mine is much more squashed in the W-E dimension since that's all my leg can support, and more recently I've been working on shifting and landing on the front leg in a better posture to mitigate that little bit of excessive load on the quad/knee (yours is different than mine due to the above, just pointing it out for your future reference). I mess around with it on various angles now to see if I can control it or find advantages in each direction. Btw, my rear foot anecdotally appears more backward in a full RoM shot relative to the intended trajectory, but it still achieves the same shift mechanic on a good day, more or less. YMMV.

lQbtsyf.gif



Here's another thing most people miss. GG's shift keeps him loaded slightly more on the posterior chain throughout the entire move while doing the zig-zag or "curvy" pattern. Watch especially where his posture is as his x-step starts to take load.

npdm577.gif



BTW, this specific theme in the transition move does vary even in top pros. Tamm, who says he copied Simon's form, has what I would call a slightly less complex transition move in this specific area with less internal torque across the whole move. Obviously he's still crushing in spite of that; I always notice how athletic and well-levered he is. The less physical advantages you have the more potential relative gains a player might find from our discussion above (that last part is a guess/hypothesis). This is also a lesson that it's worth testing things out, but if you're after Simon's move specifically what I wrote above is probably defensible.
 
Last edited:
Too rigid? lol C'mon man, you in here talking about diagonals yourself.
Lol, I just mean in this case I was trying to find name that describes it in more of a flowy curvy way that I'm trying to feel rather than hard angles. Still wanting a better name than curvy or zigzag but naming is one of the hard things..
 
Lol, I just mean in this case I was trying to find name that describes it in more of a flowy curvy way that I'm trying to feel rather than hard angles. Still wanting a better name than curvy or zigzag but naming is one of the hard things..
Yeah, I thing a lot of the problems with naming here and elsewhere tends to be directly related to (1) differences in the core concept for how the motion works and (2) various "home grown" approaches to teaching the move, and often both.

Zig zag works if you focus on CoM-centric model and force vectors in that context (i.e., use it as your causal framework).

The emergent appearance becomes sort of "curvy" in that case when mediated through a real human body in all its weirdness.

Anecdotally the move "felt" more zig zaggy when I first started tinkering with it or again when I change something (i.e., it feels way more in touch with the force vectors model), then starts to feel organically more curvy within a day or two after my brain gets the point. Maybe just me, but interesting.

Note: editing a couple words in my post above now for clarity.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I thing a lot of the problems with naming here and elsewhere tends to be directly related to (1) differences in the core concept for how the motion works and (2) various "home grown" approaches to teaching the move, and often both.

Zig zag works if you focus on CoM-centric model and force vectors in that context (i.e., use it as your causal framework).

The emergent appearance becomes sort of "curvy" in that case when mediated through a real human body in all its weirdness.

Note: editing a couple words in my post above now for clarity.
Yeah, it's pretty amazing how powerful the words can be. I haven't spent enough time trying to name things well because I'll never get to post anything if I try to find good names, lmao.

But zigzag in my mental imagery would be like a starting exaggeration to feel the motion and then you would smoothen it out to gentler curves since a zigzag image is usually abrupt changes in directions / sharp angles.

"Swaying" might have been a good word to use..

I think part of the reason you saw my prep step knee go over my toes was because I was anticipating that I was going to push off of it to get more eastward weight shift onto my X step so I got some counter prep movement.

Did you try feeling the effect on weight shift into the X step that a more open prep step has? It seems like it more naturally redirects your weight shift off the lead foot and back more onto the X step, plus keeps you more open to look at the target. Also it make make it easier to not turn the x step backwards too much since you are more open still.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2421.mov
    15.1 MB
Yeah, it's pretty amazing how powerful the words can be. I haven't spent enough time trying to name things well because I'll never get to post anything if I try to find good names, lmao.

But zigzag in my mental imagery would be like a starting exaggeration to feel the motion and then you would smoothen it out to gentler curves since a zigzag image is usually abrupt changes in directions / sharp angles.
In terms of coaching or mentalization I agree. I have no special interest in the labels per se - just wanted to affirm that the literal force vectors mediated through the body play out to cause the more curvalicious natural motion. I'm glad I just got to write "curvalicious" lmao

"Swaying" might have been a good word to use..
Sway is literally the same concept in the Waltz, which I did before disc golf. Athletic mode and posture is a little different but a lot of the principles crossover in terms of balance and CoG movement, postural frame of reference, etc. Here, the disc is like a much less massive dance partner.
I think part of the reason you saw my prep step knee go over my toes was because I was anticipating that I was going to push off of it to get more eastward weight shift onto my X step so I got some counter prep movement.
Yep. Won't need to do that at all once you learn the Swivel Stairs/Buttwipe/Open-to-Closed Crush the can part of the shift. It'll just happen automatically.

Did you try feeling the effect on weight shift into the X step that a more open prep step has? It seems like it more naturally redirects your weight shift off the lead foot and back more onto the X step, plus keeps you more open to look at the target. Also it make make it easier to not turn the x step backwards too much since you are more open still.
Yes, I did play/am playing with this and am glad we are still talking about it. I'm drinking wine avoiding editing a thesis so bear with me lol:

In my little motion experiments I'm increasingly convinced that this question is related to the idea of coming off the heel (Paul Oman, Taylor Chocek, Simon either intentionally or mistakenly doing it here):

fwi9zgG.gif


I'm still trying to decide what to conclude in entirety, but let me see if I can explain how that relates to a more apparently rearward facing foot that still comes off the instep instead of the heel.

Basically, I'm finding that coming off the heel it's very hard or perhaps impossible to "spin shift" (which is bad - that is forced internal rotation in the rear leg to try and induce the shift forward - instead, the internal rotation is supposed to happen as part of the backswing in pro movement within the continuous "Figure 8" action). I think this is because a shift off the heel completely removes that option due to removing the rear foot instep as an option for leverage, meaning it's almost impossible to internally rotate it by force while moving targetward (there is nothing to leverage against to do it). As a result, it's much easier to "shift from behind" leading with the full mass of the body creating the elastic tension against the disc approaching the peak of the backswing (which is good!).

My current guess is that this move off the heel can be quite powerful if the rest is working well enough (e.g., Oman, Chocek both throw very far, though always look at those levers + overall ultra-elite athleticism in the latter case), but I do wonder what would happen if those players instead optimized a Figure 8 coming off the rear foot instep even if the whole move opens up to have a nearly rear-facing step, but still leveraging off the instep like either Simon or GG or Eagle usually do. This would be the rebuttal from CoM/zig zag/intersports theory about what a rear facing foot actually means, or should mean.

In any case, Drill suggestion (for anyone) and please compare notes:
Compare and do Simon's prior heel move (copied here again)
fwi9zgG.gif

to how Simon's X-step usually functions even when he does little preshot routines - this is just the small version of his full move, but his full arm swing below is a deceptively good idea - you should be able to do it momentously like this without the disc coming out ("slash through" the release point):
89PlEIu.gif


Try something like the hammer and/or disc swing, intentional heel x-step, then intentional instep x-step and mess around with where you coil the backswing. Do it with the disc more vertical to feel its weight and air resistance against it, then slash like Simon. Feel how it interacts with how your x-stepping leg loads and unloads and how it affects your balance. See when the move and balance off the heel feels a heck of a lot like that, but coming off the instep.

I'm focusing you on the space of interactions because yours will probably settle somewhere quite specific to your own body and motion pattern.

What's "best"?
E.g., I was too curious/stubborn/dumb for a while to realize that I should just let mine coil back more like GG which also sort of stabilized my rear leg on its own to the extent that was possible. I suspect that if you just "hard swapped" Simon's backswing style with GG's in the side by shot here, neither move would immediately work because their lower body would have to counter the change in the upper body (which possibly both of them could do with practice and they had different developmental histories - that's mostly just a thought experiment for you there). Also pay attention to their follow through on otherwise very similar shots and think about why they appear to differ. Notice that neither of them even has a hint of a risk of the knee shearing forward I noticed earlier - it's because they are using the buttwipe-like posture and action to stay more loaded on the posterior chain the whole time not unlike a pitcher or batter.

ViqHhv3.gif

So how much is anatomy, posture theory, the Figure 8 pattern, and otherwise stretched out or modified for max distance? I mentioned Tamm earlier. Why did I envy Simon's move even slightly more than this really damn awesome form in an absolute trebuchet of a man? Does his foot ever really point all the way backwards? Do Simon or Drew's? Or is it just a function of the same Figure 8 idea stretched out to its absolute limits in RoM relative to the trajectory? Does this matter?

0cqkOus.gif


t407RN2.gif

This one changed what I see forever. How does this little slip help us learn so much from a diminutive crusher? Notice where her reachback goes:
XTBWXaz.gif
 
Last edited:
"Swaying" might have been a good word to use..
I wouldn't use that term to describe this motion because in most sports swaying is considered a bad thing and I've also used it that way in critiques. Then we have more conflicting terminology which we probably already have enough of like "crow hop" for example is the opposite of the x-step/shuffle step.

I have no issue with curvy, but would tend to use to zig zag, diagonals, rocking, circles, sine wave, wavy, oscillation, figure 8, locomotion.
 
I wouldn't use that term to describe this motion because in most sports swaying is considered a bad thing and I've also used it that way in critiques. Then we have more conflicting terminology which we probably already have enough of like "crow hop" for example is the opposite of the x-step/shuffle step.

I have no issue with curvy, but would tend to use to zig zag, diagonals, rocking, circles, sine wave, wavy, oscillation, figure 8, locomotion.
To be clear I completely agree with this in terms of sway - it's essential in waltz and there is a similar balance concept, but I later better appreciated that dance posture and athletic posture are two different modes of moving overall. Having gradually gotten better at athletic posture here I would say that the dancing concepts can help with some aspects of the balance, but not all of it for sports, so I tend to not quite call it a "sway" often anymore either.

Your term set there otherwise still seems highly instructive to me.
 
In terms of coaching or mentalization I agree. I have no special interest in the labels per se - just wanted to affirm that the literal force vectors mediated through the body play out to cause the more curvalicious natura motion. I'm glad I just got to write "curvalicious" lmao


Sway is literally the same concept in the Waltz, which I did before disc golf. Athletic mode and posture is a little different but a lot of the principles crossover in terms of balance and CoG movement, postural frame of reference, etc. Here, the disc is like a much less massive dance partner.

Yep. Won't need to do that at all once you learn the Swivel Stairs/Buttwipe/Open-to-Closed Crush the can part of the shift. It'll just happen automatically.


Yes, I did play/am playing with this and am glad we are still talking about it. I'm drinking wine avoiding editing a thesis so bear with me lol:

In my little motion experiments I'm increasingly convinced that this question is related to the idea of coming off the heel (Paul Oman, Taylor Chocek, Simon either intentionally or mistakenly doing it here):

fwi9zgG.gif


I'm still trying to decide what to conclude in entirety, but let me see if I can explain how that relates to a more apparently rearward facing foot that still comes off the instep instead of the heel.

Basically, I'm finding that coming off the heel it's very hard or perhaps impossible to "spin shift" (which is bad - that is forced internal rotation in the rear leg to try and induce the shift forward - instead, the internal rotation is supposed to happen as part of the backswing in pro movement within the continuous "Figure 8" action). I think this is because a shift off the heel completely removes that option due to removing the rear foot instep as an option for leverage, meaning it's almost impossible to internally rotate it by force while moving targetward (there is nothing to leverage against to do it). As a result, it's much easier to "shift from behind" leading with the full mass of the body creating the elastic tension against the disc approaching the peak of the backswing (which is good!).

My current guess is that this move off the heel can be quite powerful if the rest is working well enough (e.g., Oman, Chocek both throw very far, though always look at those levers + overall ultra-elite athleticism in the latter case), but I do wonder what would happen if those players instead optimized a Figure 8 coming off the rear foot instep even if the whole move opens up to have a nearly rear-facing step, but still leveraging off the instep like either Simon or GG or Eagle usually do. This would be the rebuttal from CoM/zig zag/intersports theory about what a rear facing foot actually means, or should mean.

In any case, Drill suggestion (for anyone) and please compare notes:
Compare and do Simon's prior heel move (copied here again)
fwi9zgG.gif

to how Simon's X-step usually functions even when he does little preshot routines - this is just the small version of his full move, but his full arm swing below is a deceptively good idea - you should be able to do it momentously like this without the disc coming out ("slash through" the release point):
89PlEIu.gif


Try something like the hammer and/or disc swing, intentional heel x-step, then intentional instep x-step and mess around with where you coil the backswing. Do it with the disc more vertical to feel its weight and air resistance against it, then slash like Simon. Feel how it interacts with how your x-stepping leg loads and unloads and how it affects your balance. See when the move and balance off the heel feels a heck of a lot like that, but coming off the instep.

I'm focusing you on the space of interactions because yours will probably settle somewhere quite specific to your own body and motion pattern.

What's "best"?
E.g., I was too curious/stubborn/dumb for a while to realize that I should just let mine coil back more like GG which also sort of stabilized my rear leg on its own to the extent that was possible. I suspect that if you just "hard swapped" Simon's backswing style with GG's in the side by shot here, neither move would immediately work because their lower body would have to counter the change in the upper body (which possibly both of them could do with practice and they had different developmental histories - that's mostly just a thought experiment for you there). Also pay attention to their follow through on otherwise very similar shots and think about why they appear to differ. Notice that neither of them even has a hint of a risk of the knee shearing forward I noticed earlier - it's because they are using the buttwipe-like posture and action to stay more loaded on the posterior chain the whole time not unlike a pitcher or batter.

ViqHhv3.gif

So how much is anatomy, posture theory, the Figure 8 pattern, and otherwise stretched out or modified for max distance? I mentioned Tamm earlier. Why did I envy Simon's move even slightly more than this really damn awesome form in an absolute trebuchet of a man? Does his foot ever really point all the way backwards? Do Simon or Drew's? Or is it just a function of the same Figure 8 idea stretched out to its absolute limits in RoM relative to the trajectory? Does this matter?

0cqkOus.gif


t407RN2.gif

This one changed what I see forever. How does this little slip help us learn so much from a diminutive crusher? Notice where her reachback goes:
XTBWXaz.gif
Interesting.

That page pierce gif reminds of this AB moment I saw in a practice round with the boys, it was at one of the Arizona courses with on the hole where they throw a big hyzer along a road to fade back to the basket near an electrical box I think. AB's rear foot slipped at a similar time but he was committed to throwing hard it seemed like and it looked like he did throw hard, but he didn't let go of the disc somehow. One of the guys he was playing with just flat out said "how did you do that?" lol.

The simon shadow swing with the red hat, I feel like he's just being super casual / lazy and that's why he is weighted on his rear heel more than usual.

I tried keeping the prep step a bit more open and it seemed to help weight shifting eastward onto the X step feel a bit more natural and I think it also made my brace path swing north east a bit more as well before coming back out north west, but I was already thinking about wanting to do more of that so, it might've also just been that.

Here's one throw where the brace path looked like it swung more than the tech disc session. I also did a special hop pivot move on the walkaway for you :ROFLMAO:

I pured some pretty tough gaps too, so it doesn't seem to affect my aim too much. But it is a little weird planning where my brace is gonna be / accounting for that in the runup line, but not bad. I'm really liking it.
 

Attachments

  • 1219.mp4
    20.1 MB
Last edited:
Interesting.

That page pierce gif reminds of this AB moment I saw in a practice round with the boys, it was at one of the Arizona courses with on the hole where they throw a big hyzer along a road to fade back to the basket near an electrical box I think. AB's rear foot slipped at a similar time but he was committed to throwing hard it seemed like and it looked like he did throw hard, but he didn't let go of the disc somehow. One of the guys he was playing with just flat out said "how did you do that?" lol.

The simon shadow swing with the red hat, I feel like he's just being super casual / lazy and that's why he is weighted on his rear heel more than usual.

I tried keeping the prep step a bit more open and it seemed to help weight shifting eastward onto the X step feel a bit more natural and I think it also made my brace path swing north east a bit more as well before coming back out north west, but I was already thinking about wanting to do more of that so, it might've also just been that.

Here's one throw where the brace path looked like it swung more than the tech disc session. I also did a special hop pivot move on the walkaway for you :ROFLMAO:
View attachment 356950

I pured some pretty tough gaps too, so it doesn't seem to affect my aim too much. But it is a little weird planning where my brace is gonna be / accounting for that in the runup line, but not bad. I'm really liking it.
That last shot is trending at least a little (and possibly much) better w.r.t. the above. IMO I'd say stick with it a bit and let's see where it ends up. Once I find that rear view on Simon mash I'm looking for I will try to convince you the "hop pivot" is basically what he is doing, just stretched out more horizontal as a stride.

Yes, watching slips in general can be highly instructive about where the forces are coming from and going. This is one of my faves:


So my motion for concensus: what PP, GG, Simon shifting off instep, Simon shifting off the heel, Chocek, and Oman all have in common is a version of what we can call & sidewinder teaches as "shifting from behind." Heel shift just tends to lose the instep leverage and full internal torque you can get on the rear side (which is also possibly why e.g. Chocek's rear arm tends to lag behind her a bit into the shift vs. the "ride the bull" move SW teaches).
 
That last shot is trending at least a little (and possibly much) better w.r.t. the above. IMO I'd say stick with it a bit and let's see where it ends up. Once I find that rear view on Simon mash I'm looking for I will try to convince you the "hop pivot" is basically what he is doing, just stretched out more horizontal as a stride.

Yes, watching slips in general can be highly instructive about where the forces are coming from and going. This is one of my faves:


So my motion for concensus: what PP, GG, Simon shifting off instep, Simon shifting off the heel, Chocek, and Oman all have in common is a version of what we can call & sidewinder teaches as "shifting from behind." Heel shift just tends to lose the instep leverage and full internal torque you can get on the rear side (which is also possibly why e.g. Chocek's rear arm tends to lag behind her a bit into the shift vs. the "ride the bull" move SW teaches).

That slip from simon looks hilarious, like his arm stopped working.

The simon clip I used in my vid for the brace path was decent. It was hard to find one without camera movement.. Btw, I was looking for that one of him 'developing' where he's younger and more vertical, if you know where that is please link. Idk how I came across it before, but couldn't figure out what to search to find it.

Here's another throw from that session, a bit more power:



protip, replace "shorts" in the URL with "watch" and you'll get the regular video player where you can use tracking features and frame by frame:

 
Why do I get these error messages with vid attachments?
View attachment 356951
Check that message again, I edited it.

I sometimes drag n drop out of habit and then it embeds it directly inline with a play button, it worked for me and I could play it in the site, but I removed it and used "attach file" instead.

Weirdly, in DM's recently I noticed I can't send vid attachments anymore, it just seems to not be supported, so they might've also changed something.
 
Check that message again, I edited it.

I sometimes drag n drop out of habit and then it embeds it directly inline with a play button, it worked for me and I could play it in the site, but I removed it and used "attach file" instead.

Weirdly, in DM's recently I noticed I can't send vid attachments anymore, it just seems to not be supported, so they might've also changed something.
Same issue still. It's like 50/50 going to work or not on vid attachments for me. Different file types I suppose, but IDK.
 
Top