S&T vs. RST at Address

One of my correspondents recently asked me to take a look at an article titled Stack and Tilt Golf from a Biomechanics Viewpoint (RST). There has been a lot of comment about the biomechanics of S&T vs. the perfect golf swing (for example, here). I cannot comment on biomechanics but, for myself, if some athletic movement is producing pain or outright injury, I'm just not going to keep doing it. If the movement is just activating weak or little used muscles producing soreness, I'm willing to keep going if the athletic movement is producing good results.

The RST (Rotary Swing Tour) article looks at five aspects of S&T vs. RST: (1) address, (2) ball position, (3) takeaway, (4) impact and (5) follow through. Before looking at each criticism, a few general points. RST theory (here) assumes that there are two basic swings that can be mastered by any golfer: RST and RS1, for rank amateurs. I disagree with this premise. Its very clear from the S&T book (here) that address, ball position, takeaway, impact and follow through are actually variables that can be manipulated to produce a particular ball flight or to fit the body confirmation of an individual golfer (GolfTec put my swing up against Ernie Els and Tiger Woods here, really). The RST article goes on to analyze Aaron Baddeley's version of the S&T swing as if it was the S&T swing. Moreover, Baddeley's variant, while he was still using it, departs from the canonical S&T swing in ways that he could have modified within the S&T framework.

Starting with address (in the graphic above), we have Chuck Quinton doing the RST setup on the left with Aaron Baddeley on the right. Baddeley is standing further away from the ball and he is balanced on the balls of his feet (yellow line) rather than over his ankles (red line). The RST swing recommends balancing through the center of the ankles provides more rotational freedom.

The graphic above shows Mike Bennett and myself at address. The address position looks very similar to RST except our torsos are flexed forward rather than the arched back position of RST. From the book (p. 46):

Your torso from the downtarget view should be flexed forward, toward the ball, but your spine should not be in a straight line. Your spine should curve forward slightly, or tilt progressively more from bottom to top, so tat your neck is angled more toward the ball than your lower back. This rounding of the spine serves two purposes. First, it allows your shoulders to roll inward and your arms to pinch against your torso., Second, it tilts your head downward so you can see the ball without straining to look out the bottoms of your eyes.

I've tried the straight-line back position advocated by RST and found it unnatural and uncomfortable. I found this out for myself well before being introduced to S&T. Obviously, for some golfers, the straight-line back position works well. Many tour players look perfectly comfortable in this position. It's one of the variables you can manipulate.

In future posts, I'll deal with ball position, takeaway, impact and follow-through.