What is the optimal biomechanical technique to achieve maximum distance in golf?

 Biomechanical Breakdown of a Golf Swing: Achieving Maximum Distance (Driver, 6-Iron, 9-Iron)


To address the question:
“What is the optimal biomechanical technique to achieve maximum distance in golf?”,

I analysed slow-motion video footage of a right-handed golfer executing full swings with three clubs: Driver, 6-Iron, and 9-Iron. Although the fundamental swing mechanics are consistent across all three clubs, each slight change in shaft length and desired result means that slight biomechanical adjustments are required to optimise distance and efficiency in each swing.


Key Concept: Kinetic Chain Efficiency

From a biomechanical perspective the golf swing involves a complex sequence of coordinated movements that rely on efficient energy transfer and precise timing. The kinematic sequence is the most important part of the swing, maximising this transfer enables the body to most effectively chain together all aspects of energy and transfer it into the clubhead. This evolves when the energy is generated from the ground and transferred through the pelvis, torso, arms, and finally the club (Cheetham et al., 2008). This sequence is supported by ground reaction forces, as the golfer pushes against the ground particularly through the lead leg to generate power (McHardy & Pollard, 2005). Maintaining balance and stability is essential to control the swing and reduce injury risk (Hume, Keogh, & Reid, 2005). The X-factor, or the rotational separation between the hips and shoulders at the top of the backswing, plays a key role in creating elastic energy for increased clubhead speed (Myers et al., 2008). Effective performance also depends on proper joint sequencing and range of motion, especially in the hips, spine, shoulders, and wrists (Gordon et al., 2009). The stretch shortening cycle allows muscles to preload during the backswing and contract forcefully during the downswing (Elliott, 1999). In addition, the clubhead path and angle of attack influence ball trajectory and are affected by posture, grip, and timing (Ball & Best, 2007). Ultimately, a successful swing requires highly coordinated timing, muscle activation, and biomechanical control to optimise performance and minimise injury.


BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF OPTIMAL SWING FOR MAXIMUM DISTANCE

In order to maximise distance in golf it essentially depends on an efficient kinetic chain that syncs angular momentum transfer, segmental sequencing and ground reaction forces throughout the throughout the swing. The swing breakdown and analysis of the 6 and 9 iron shows biomechanical adjustments made to tailor teach clubs requirements. These adjustments are similar to the ones seen in swings of professional golfers like Dustin Johnson and Rory McIlroy, where their swings demonstrate the biomechanical concepts essential to maximise distance. 


1. Setup (Address Position) Screenshots 1.1, 2.1, 3.1

Beginning with the setup of the swing, the driver club position in the data has the ball positioned inside the lead heel, with 55% of the body weight on the trail foot and slight tilt of the spine away from the direction it is to be hit in. This shows similarity to pro golfers’ technique  as it promotes a upward strike angle which is approximately +2 to +4 degrees, which is important in order to reach optimal launch angle and reducing spin (Zheng at al., 2008).

 

Correct posture enables an upward angle of attack which is beneficial for longer carry, as it allows the club to bottom out after contact with the ball. Compared to the driver the 6 and 9 iron adopt more central ball positions and more upright spine postures and increased forward shaft lean (Myers et al., 2008). The transition of the posture is explained by need to align the low point of the swings arc beneath the ball with the 6 and 9 iron, in order to get maximal force transfer at contact with the ball.

 

The weight distribution of pro golfers’ stance in driver setups is the same with placing 55% on the trail foot to preload the kinetic chain, the same goes with the 6 and 9 iron with moving towards a balanced or lead foot dominant stance which gives better control (Ball &Best, 2007). The positioning and posture has a direct influence on the vertical ground reaction forces and torque generation when utilising each club’s function.


Club

Ball Position

Posture & Spine Tilt

Weight Distribution

Shaft Angle

Driver

Inside lead heel

Slight spine tilt away from target

55% on trail foot

Neutral to slightly back

6-Iron

Just forward of centre

Upright spine, minimal tilt

Balanced 50/50

Slightly forward

9-Iron

Centre

More upright, neutral spine


55% on lead foot

Forward

Biomechanical Analysis:

  • Driver setup promotes an ascending strike for low spin and high launch.

  • 6- and 9-iron setups encourage a descending angle of attack, needed for ball compression and distance through spin control.

  • The spine tilt and hand position subtly adjust with club length to maintain the correct low point in the swing arc.





2. Backswing Clips 1.2, 2.2, 3.2

During the backswing stage the shoulder turn is 90+ degrees and around 45-degree hip rotation, produces a large rotational separation of should and hips storing that elastic energy in the core. Pro golfers such as Johnson can achieve around 50 degrees of rotational separation which enables him to produce up to 193 km/h of club head speedm. The driver swing analysed demonstrates full arm extension and around 70% trail foot loading which maximises the swing arc and angular momentum. Comparing this to the 6 iron it has 85-to-90-degree shoulder turn which is a bit less, same with the hip rotation of 40 degrees and reduced extension. And comparing both to the 9 iron (SEE DATA) which is more compact swing as it prioritises control and precision over distance and speed.
 
The reduction of shoulder and hip use decreases the stored elastic energy , though enhances neuromuscular coordination (Meister et al., 2011). Muscle that activate during the backswing include the gluteus maximus and hamstrings that eccentrically stabilise  the trail leg, which helps avoid early hip rotation same with scapular stabilisers in preserving shoulder girdle integrity to support arm extension (Wells et al., 2009).


Club

Shoulder Turn

Hip Rotation

Arm Extension

Weight Shift

X-Factor

Driver

90°+

45°

Full extension

~70% on trail foot

Large (~45°)

6-Iron

~85–90°

40°

Slightly reduced

~65%

Moderate

9-Iron

~75–80°

35°

Compact

~60%

Smaller


Biomechanical Analysis:

  • The driver backswing uses greater torso-hip separation (X-factor) to store more elastic energy.

  • The 6-iron backswing is slightly shorter but still full and powerful, balancing speed with control.

  • The 9-iron backswing is more compact and controlled, prioritising precision while still generating power.

Muscles active during the backswing:

  • Core (obliques, rectus abdominis) – for rotational control

  • Glutes and hamstrings – eccentric loading of trail leg

  • Scapular stabilisers – to support shoulder rotation and arm structure


  

3. Transition (Top of Backswing to Downswing) Screenshot 1.3, 2.3, 3.3

The transition phase of the swing involves using the stretch shortening cycle as the golfers is quickly reversing direction through eccentric to concentric contractions within the core and lower limbs. In this phase the pelvis initiates the down swing rotation before the torso, arms and the club, this proximal to distal sequencing is important to optimise angular velocity at the club head (Tinmark et al., 2010). From a biomechanically point the ideal transition sequence (Hips > Torso > Arms > Club)  starts from the lower body for all three of the swings conducted. Using the driver the ground reaction forces peaks around this phase, with the driver having highest vertical ground reaction force, which is then followed by the 6 and 9 iron with moderate ground reaction force (Sato et al., 2013).


Club

Initiation

Sequence

Lag Angle

GRF Use

Driver

Lower body leads

Hips → torso → arms → club

Maintained

High vertical force

6-Iron

Lower body leads

Same sequence

Maintained

Moderate-high

9-Iron

Lower body leads

Same sequence

Less pronounced

Moderate


Biomechanical Analysis:

  • All transitions begin with pelvic rotation and weight shift to the lead side.

  • Ground Reaction Forces (GRF) are highest with the driver, producing maximum vertical push.

  • The 6-iron still uses significant GRF, while the 9-iron transitions more smoothly to maintain control.

Stretch-shortening cycles in the core and hips help rapidly reverse direction, converting stored elastic energy into explosive rotation.






4. Downswing Clip 1.4, 2.4, 3.4


During the downswing stage the key biomechanical principle is segmental summation, the sequences of acceleration and rotation of bigger to smaller body segments, this enables the most speed of the club during the downswing. The downswing of the driver (See Figure) shows open hip of around 40 to 45 degrees at contact and an extending leg which acts as a braking mechanism that decelerates the pelvis and allows the upper limbs and to to continue to accelarte at a faster rate (Myers et al., 2008). The braking action maintains the angle between the lead arm and the club shaft, which store the elastic energy that is release during the wrist movement before contact with the ball.
 
Looking at the 6 and 9 iron  the downswing shows a reduced hip opening and an earlier lag release this is because the priority is focused on strike consistency and spin control rather than maximising speed, which is characterised of pro golfers using irons, where managing the clubs moment of inertia and optimising the launch angle and spin rate is more important (Joyce et al., 2013)
 

Club

Hip Rotation at Impact

Lead Leg Action

Lag Release

Clubhead Speed

Driver

~40–45° open

Extending (braking)

Very delayed

Highest (~105–120+ mph)

6-Iron

~35–40° open

Extending moderately

Delayed

Medium-high (~80–90 mph)

9-Iron

~30–35° open

Less aggressive

Earlier

Lower (~70–80 mph)

 

Biomechanical Analysis:

  • The driver downswing is the most explosive, using segmental summation to whip the clubhead through impact.

  • The 6-iron preserves much of this pattern but with slightly more control.

  • The 9-iron downswing trades speed for accuracy, using a shorter arc and earlier wrist release.

Hip and torso separation remains key:

  • Pelvis begins to "brake" as torso accelerates past it.

  • Wrists release late to maximise clubhead speed (especially with longer clubs).


  

5. Impact and Follow-through Clip 1.5, 2.5, 3.5

Club

Shaft Lean

Ball Contact

Weight Distribution

Finish Position

Driver

Slightly behind hands

Sweeping/upward

85–90% lead foot

Tall, high finish

6-Iron

Slightly ahead of hands

Slight downward strike

90% lead foot

Balanced, full rotation

9-Iron

More ahead of hands

Steeper downward strike

90%+ lead foot

Compact, upright finish


Biomechanical Analysis:

  • Driver impact is focused on launch angle and low spin. The pelvis and chest are open to the target.

  • 6-iron impact uses a descending blow, compressing the ball while still launching it with speed.

  • 9-iron delivers a steep, controlled strike with greater shaft lean — important for spin and accuracy.

In all follow-throughs:

  • The finish is balanced and complete, showing efficient energy transfer without loss of posture or over-rotation.

  • Core and glute activation stabilise the finish and prevent injury.


  



EQUATIONS

Driver

  • Impulse (J = Ft): 10.04 Ns

  • Force at Impact (F = Δp/Δt): 20,000.0 N

  • Torque (T = rF): 320.83 Nm

  • Angular Velocity (ω = v/r): 45.45 rad/s

  • Moment of Inertia (I = mr²): 0.242 kg·m²

  • Angular Momentum (L = Iω): 11.34 kg·m²/s

6-Iron

  • Impulse: 9.52 Ns

  • Force at Impact: 19,000.0 N

  • Torque: 261.84 Nm

  • Angular Velocity: 38.03 rad/s

  • Moment of Inertia: 0.25 kg·m²

  • Angular Momentum: 9.58 kg·m²/s

9-Iron

  • Impulse: 9.24 Ns

  • Force at Impact: 18,480.0 N

  • Torque: 212.38 Nm

  • Angular Velocity: 34.74 rad/s

  • Moment of Inertia: 0.2527 kg·m²

  • Angular Momentum: 8.78 kg·m²/s


PRACTICAL FINDINGS

To achieve maximum distance, it requires more than technique and skill refining. Golfers need to be supported by biomechanically focused physical training, neuromuscular development and correct equipment. By focusing on the biomechanics of these techniques it can increase force output, improve the efficiency in the kinetic chain and allow for optimal energy transfer from the body to the golf ball.

 

PHYSICAL CONDITIONING FOR FORCE PRODUCTION

Golfers needs to develop physical qualities that support a strong and mechanically effective and efficient swing. The golfer’s ability to generate rotational velocity and transfer it through the kinetic chain is influenced by their core strength, lower body power and torso mobility (Read & Lloyd, 2014). Golfers may look to incorporate exercises such as medicine ball throws, Russian twists and landmine rotations all which target areas like the oblique muscles that contribute to the torso torque during the backswing. Lower body plyometric exercisers are also important to improve the ground reaction force, exercises like box jumps, split squat jumps and lateral bounds help improve golfers ability to generate force against the ground (Newtons third law) and transfer that force up through the body during the down swing, exercises like these make use of the stretch shortening cycle of the lower limbs to help reach high angular velocity at the hips and torso (Read & Lloyd, 2014). Another physical conditioning is to maintain the range of motion to perform complete and efficient backswing through drills that build mobility. The main mobility targets includes hips, shoulders and thoracic spine, which are areas that rotate to enhance segmental rotation (Read & Lloyd, 2014). To do this exercises including 90/90 hip rotations, thoracic rotations and y press, help maintain the ideal joint kinematics, which reduce mechanical constraints that can limit the performance output.

 


NEUROMUSCULAR CONTROL AND SWING SEQUENCING

Golf is a sport that requires precise control of movement timing and coordination, mainly during the proximal to distal sequencing of the downswing motion. Choosing appropriate training methods that focusing on enhancing neuromuscular control is important in order to get proper activation and timing of muscle groups involved in the kinetic chain (Cole & Grimshaw, 2015). Reinforcing drills that follow proper movement, can help golfers internalise the sequencing from the hips to shoulders to arms. Personalised drills support the activation sequence required at impact for maximum clubhead velocity (Cole & Grimshaw, 2015). Using external cueing like hitting targets or visual checkpoints golfers improve their motor learning and helps reduce factors like early release of the club (casting), which ultimately can lead to a loss of energy through the swing resulting in a reduced power/distance (Cole & Grimshaw, 2015). A more popular training method is overload and underloaded swings. Overload is utilising heavier clubs to increase resistance, also focusing on enhancing strength but also the ability to maintain the swing mechanics under greater loads (Uthoff et al., 2021). On the other hand lighter clubs cause underload, which can improve swing speed and the rate of which the force is applied. Both methods need to be regulated and supervised to ensure the golfers biomechanical efficiency is maintained as changing the weight can lead to swing form degradation as overtime suboptimal motor patterns are reinforced (Uthoff et al., 2021).

 

EQUIPMENT OPTIMISATION FOR BIOMECHANICAL EFFIECENCY

Another crucial aspect is using the correct equipment for the right situation but also a golfers physical and mechanical characteristics. The biomechanical outcome of the swing is impacted by the length, weight, grip, shaft flex and club head loft (Joyce et al., 2013). These equipment characteristics affect the club’s moment of inertia, release timing and the angle/orientation of the club face at contact (Joyce et al., 2013). A shaft that is stiff can limit energy transfer as there is less flex therefore more power/speed is required lowering the efficiency of the swing, though golfers who use stiff shafts gain greater accuracy. In contrast having a shaft that is too flexible may cause an open face (Hitting the ball on angle, resulting in a slice) at impact which leads to a reduction in ball velocity and thus distance (Joyce et al., 2013). Using the correct shaft flex allows for the golfer to load and unload the during the swing, which increases the angular momentum and energy transfer at contact (Joyce et al., 2013).


Injury prevention

 

When caring for golfers, it is important to understand the golf swing, swing biomechanics, and injuries, both general and specific to golfers, just like any sport. Most golf injuries are related to overuse syndromes, but can result from poor swing mechanics, poor core stability and strength, improper warm-up, and striking foreign objects (Rocha Piedade et al., 2021). McCarroll15 noted that too much play or practice (ie, overuse) was the most commonly reported mechanism of injury in both professional and amateur golfers. In a survey of 193 amateur golfers, Batt4 found that poor swing mechanics and overuse were the two most cited causes of injury.

 

Professional golfers tend to become more injured overall and amateur golfers tend to sustain more elbow injuries. Golfers who carry their own golf bag had a higher risk of low back, shoulder, or ankle injury as well. They also found that there were differences in swing biomechanics comparing amateur and professional golfers that affect the relative risk of injury. Amateur golfers attempted to generate more power and speed using their upper extremities which results in greater spinal torque and lateral bending forces on the lumbar spine. On the other hand, professional golfers’ swings allow for greater trunk rotation and swing velocities consistently (Rocha Piedade et al., 2021).

 

McHardy et al3 performed a 1-year prospective study on injuries in 588 golfers in Australia. The overall incidence for rate of injury was 15.8 injuries per 100 golfers (range, 0.36 to 0.60 injuries per 1,000 hours per person); 46.2% of injuries were reportedly sustained during the golf swing, and injury was most likely to occur at the point of ball impact (23.7%). Studies have shown that the low back is one of the most commonly injured sites, followed closely by the elbow/forearm, shoulder/upper arm, and foot/ankle.

 

The low back is the most common injury sustained whilst playing golf, and the dynamic action of the golf swing and when repeated frequently can result in injury which can be overuse or traumatic in nature. Overuse injuries predominate in the professional golfer, and amateur golfer injury tends to occur secondary to an incorrect golf swing (McHardy, Pollard and Luo, 2006).

 

Upper limb injuries are also common due to their role in linking the fast-moving golf club with the power-generating torso. Fortunately, injury from a club or ball strike is rare. More common are the overuse injuries associated with the back, neck and shoulder (McHardy, Pollard and Luo, 2006). 

 

Injuries can occur at any point during the golf swing, from takeaway through follow-through. Upper extremity injuries can affect the hands, elbow, and shoulder and are usually a result of the golf swing at impact. Injuries are also common in the lower back as well as the lower extremities. Most injuries are the result of overuse and poor swing mechanics. Most injuries are the result of overuse, and left untreated, they can lead to chronic musculoskeletal problems.2 Common injuries have been documented in the low back, elbow, shoulder, wrist, and knee (Zouzias et al., 2018).

 

There is a large volume of literature that discusses the importance of appropriate range of movement and flexibility at specific joints and soft tissues in order to perform an optimal golf swing. It has been shown that static stretching during warm-up can lead to decreased performance compared to active, dynamic stretches during pre-competition warm-up. Recreational golfers are 3.2 (odds ratio) times more likely to report an injury when they do not perform a warm-up (Gladdines et al., 2022). (McHardy, Pollard and Luo, 2006) found that warming up for greater than 10 minutes had a positive effect for reducing injury rates and active dynamic stretching plus functional resistance bands led to significant increases in consistent ball strike, maximal driving distance and smash factor with improvement but not a significant difference in maximum clubhead speed and driving accuracy. They concluded that it is beneficial to use a warm-up program that includes activation of key rotational and stability muscle groups and motor patterns in addition to dynamic flexibility in order to prepare the upper body, trunk, and legs for power production. To reduced injury trainers have found that improving golfers’ overall strength, power, core and flexibility will reduce the risk of injury and increase the clubhead speed and distance of the ball.

 

The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons recommends to always warm up before a round of golf, which should consist of increasing blood flow to all muscles, raising muscle temperature, and stretches focusing on shoulder, back, and legs followed by hitting a few balls on the driving range. The best golf-specific exercise program should concentrate on a combination of strength and stability in the core and lumbar spine, periscapular musculature, and hips. One should also focus on mobility in the hip joints and the thoracic spine.


Conclusion: Optimal Biomechanical Technique by Club

Element

Driver

6-Iron

9-Iron

Power Source

Max X-factor, GRF, full coil

Balanced torque and timing

Shorter swing, precise rotation

Key Focus

Clubhead speed and launch angle

Compression with moderate control

Accuracy with consistent contact

GRF Use

High (vertical push)

Moderate-high

Moderate

Angle of Attack

Slightly upward

Slightly downward

Steep downward


Summary:

The best biomechanical method is tailored to each club and differs slightly from each other. In order to maximise distance, the driver prioritises power and effective sequencing. The 6-iron demands a balance between control and speed in order to produce distance with high accuracy. The 9-iron swing is small, controlled, and relies on exact movements to gain high spin and distance effectively. Although the kinetic chain, ground forces, and torque management must be used effectively by all three clubs, the strength and function of these forces vary depending on the club.



References


Ball, K. A., & Best, R. J. (2007). Different centre of pressure patterns within the golf stroke I: Cluster analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences, 25(7), 757–770. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410600874971

Cole, M. H., & Grimshaw, P. N. (2015). The Biomechanics of the Modern Golf Swing: Implications for Lower Back Injuries. Sports Medicine, 46(3), 339–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-015-0429-1

Cools, A. M., Maenhout, A. G., Vanderstukken, F., Declève, P., Johansson, F. R., & Borms, D. (2020). The challenge of the sporting shoulder: From injury prevention through sport-specific rehabilitation toward return to play. Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 64(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rehab.2020.03.009

Crews, D., Lutz, R., Cheetham, P. J., Rose, G. A., & Vint, P. F. (2008, January 1). Comparison of Kinematic Sequence Parameters between Amateur and Professional Golfers. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252236426_Comparison_of_Kinematic_Sequence_Parameters_between_Amateur_and_Professional_Golfers

Gladdines, S., von Gerhardt, A. L., Verhagen, E., Beumer, A., & Eygendaal, D. (2022). The effectiveness of a golf injury prevention program (GRIPP intervention) compared to the usual warm-up in Dutch golfers: protocol design of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13102-022-00511-4

Glazier, P. S. (2010). Game, Set and Match? Substantive Issues and Future Directions in Performance Analysis. Sports Medicine, 40(8), 625–634. https://doi.org/10.2165/11534970-000000000-00000

Gordon, B. S., Moir, G. L., Davis, S. E., Witmer, C. A., & Cummings, D. M. (2009). An Investigation Into the Relationship of Flexibility, Power, and Strength to Club Head Speed in Male Golfers. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 23(5), 1606–1610. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0b013e3181a3c39d

Hume, P. A., Keogh, J., & Reid, D. (2005). The Role of Biomechanics in Maximising Distance and Accuracy of Golf Shots. Sports Medicine, 35(5), 429–449. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200535050-00005

Joyce, C., Burnett, A., Cochrane, J., & Ball, K. (2013). Three-dimensional trunk kinematics in golf: between-club differences and relationships to clubhead speed. Sports Biomechanics, 12(2), 108–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2012.728244

McHardy, A., & Pollard, H. (2005). Muscle activity during the golf swing . British Journal of Sports Medicine, 39(11), 799–804. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2005.020271

McHardy, A., Pollard, H., & Luo, K. (2006). Golf Injuries. Sports Medicine, 36(2), 171–187. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200636020-00006

Meister, D. W., Ladd, A. L., Butler, E. E., Zhao, B., Rogers, A. P., Ray, C. J., & Rose, J. (2011). Rotational Biomechanics of the Elite Golf Swing: Benchmarks for Amateurs. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 27(3), 242–251. https://doi.org/10.1123/jab.27.3.242

Myers, J., Lephart, S., Tsai, Y.-S., Sell, T., Smoliga, J., & Jolly, J. (2008). The role of upper torso and pelvis rotation in driving performance during the golf swing. Journal of Sports Sciences, 26(2), 181–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410701373543

Read, P. J., & Lloyd, R. S. (2014). Strength and Conditioning Considerations for Golf. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 36(5), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1519/ssc.0000000000000062

Rocha PiedadeS., Neyret, P., Espregueira-MendesJ., Cohen, M., & Hutchinson, M. R. (2021). Specific sports-related Injuries. Springer ; [San Ramon.

Tinmark, F., Hellström, J., Halvorsen, K., & Thorstensson, A. (2010). Elite golfers’ kinematic sequence in full-swing and partial-swing shots. Sports Biomechanics, 9(4), 236–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2010.535842

Uthoff, A., Sommerfield, L. M., & Pichardo, A. W. (2021). Effects of Resistance Training Methods on Golf Clubhead Speed and Hitting Distance: A Systematic Review. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 35(9), 2651–2660. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000004085

Wells, G. D., Elmi, M., & Thomas, S. (2009). Physiological Correlates of Golf Performance. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 23(3), 741–750. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0b013e3181a07970

Zheng, N., Barrentine, S., Fleisig, G., & Andrews, J. (2008). Kinematic Analysis of Swing in Pro and Amateur Golfers. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 29(6), 487–493. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-989229

Zouzias, I. C., Hendra, J., Stodelle, J., & Limpisvasti, O. (2018). Golf Injuries. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 26(4), 116–123. https://doi.org/10.5435/jaaos-d-15-00433

Comments