A HELPING HAND

[hcw]

so long, farewell, auf wiedersehen, good-bye....

hcw,

I feel it is time to stop trying to help you since ‘deprogramming’ is indeed a very fastidious task.

Be happy with your believes, live is short, keep on trucking, you have my blessings.

glad to see you decided to take my advice...a wise choice as the truth is indeed a formidable opponent!

 

[Biffer]

glad to see you decided to take my advice...a wise choice as the truth is indeed a formidable opponent!

 

[mandrin]

homework

[size=-2]still trying to use consevation of linear momentum in a system where you have admitted (post #99) it is not valid...

actually torque, energy, and work all have the same units (dimensions)...[/size]

hcw,

Failing to understand science you could still have a brilliant career in politics especially to prepare pubs for political campaigns as a spin doctor.

Please reread carefully previous posts and you will notice immediately how you are just making a really a fool of yourself.

At least you are capable to pick up in posts that seemingly torque and work are expressed using the same symbols.

I probably now am forced to point out to you that it does not correspond to the same physical reality. Indeed this is also the error made by g2m.

Work is the scalar product of force and displacement whereas torque is the cross product of distance to center of rotation (radius) and force.

In laymen terms this means that for work, the displacement in line with the force is important, whereas for torque it is the force component at right angle to the radius.

That being said play some golf and try to enjoy it, and do yourself some real good by reading some science books, perhaps for bed time reading.

 

[azgolfer]

It seems to me that the ball's acceleration is proportional to the clubhead's deceleration during impact, so you actually want the maximum clubhead deceleration during impact. Also, I think the problem most golfers have is the clubhead decelerates before impact, due to an improper release.

 

[mandrin]

David & Goliath

Thankfully there is yours truly to make sense out of all this mess...

There was once a young boy named David.
There was once a mighty GIANT name Goliath.
The post-game summary was brief: David kicked Goliath's arse.
---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
Do you want to spend your money with a teacher that resists new ideas and findings, and the real-world experience of someone who tests everything?
Or one that just says: “Because I or someone else says so” or “It’s in the book?”

Brian,

Very entertaining. I guess that it is likely the way your teaching is being done. I appreciate your guts as it is not just an opinion, as it is for me with no consequence, but a matter of bread and butter and beyond.

It is normally very difficult to change a perception which has been stated often. The simple repetition takes value of truth. There is not only inertia involved in hitting a ball there is even more in the mind of many.

To a certain extend it is a bit strange that one could consider seriously to be able to change, compensate or control anything during a fleeting instant of 0.0004 to 0.0005 sec. It only takes a modest effort, especially for those with a science background, to be readily convinced.

Once impact occurs one just can’t compete wit the huge inertial impact force of about 3000 lb using some puny force exerted by a golfer for only 0.0005 sec. There are two completely distinct phases in the down swing, i.e., -1- prior to impact and -2- impact interval.

The only thing that matters is to get the proper 3D alignments for clubhead and clubface at the onset of impact, since there is nothing to be done which can possibly change anything during impact itself.

For instance if you strike the ball away from the sweet spot large torques will be generated twisting the clubface. However too late for any resistance or compensation. The shaft and the golfer’s hands ensemble just isn’t any match for the vicious onslaught.

The characteristic properties of the shaft are important not because of impact but what happened before. Each golfer is very individual with respect to forces/torques applied during the downswing and hence affecting the ensuing 3D alignments of clubface and clubhead at the onset of impact.

 

[golfbulldog]

something else needs a "helping hand"...

Mandrin, your work on this thread is nearly done... we should turn your attention elsewhere.

Do you have any particular "bee in your bonnet"?

How about discussing MOI matched clubs?

Straight plane line?

the old classic - "hitting up on the driver"?

Does low point always have to exist opposite left shoulder?

time for a new thread...

 

[golf2much]

Hitting up on the driver is such old news....

Mandrin, your work on this thread is nearly done... we should turn your attention elsewhere.

Do you have any particular "bee in your bonnet"?

How about discussing MOI matched clubs?

Straight plane line?

the old classic - "hitting up on the driver"?

Does low point always have to exist opposite left shoulder?

time for a new thread...

Judging by the audience this thread is attracting there seems to be a pretty high interest in the topic. You have to go back to April to find a thread more viewed than this one.

Anyway, leave Mandrin alone, he's in his element here and enjoys the role he plays. The bee in his particular bonnet is that he wants everyone to understand this stuff s clearly as he does. And besides, this has been one of the most educational and thought provoking threads in which I've participated in a long time, on any site.

You mean you guys DON"T hit up on the driver... you just don't know what you're missing... or maybe that's why the RC is "over there", again.

G2M

 

[hcw]

Bedtime thoughts

...Work is the scalar product of force and displacement whereas torque is the cross product of distance to center of rotation (radius) and force.

In laymen terms this means that for work, the displacement in line with the force is important, whereas for torque it is the force component at right angle to the radius...

mathematically technically correct...but laddie do you think that the fact that you have forces acting in both cases and they both cause displacement (linear vs. rotational) to give terms with identical dimensions is mere coincidence?

-hcw

PS-couldn't resist that last little bit of "help" could you?

 

[hcw]

Strange Things

...To a certain extend it is a bit strange that one could consider seriously to be able to change, compensate or control anything during a fleeting instant of 0.0004 to 0.0005 sec. It only takes a modest effort, especially for those with a science background, to be readily convinced...

interestingly, you are the only person i have ever heard suggest that anyone considers this as possible!

 

[hcw]

Role Playing

...Anyway, leave Mandrin alone, he's in his element here and enjoys the role he plays. The bee in his particular bonnet is that he wants everyone to understand this stuff s clearly as he does....
G2M

...in his element for sure...the problem is that he doesn't understand this stuff anywhere near as clearly as he thinks he thinks (and would like you to believe)...but i think the bulldog is right and this thread needs a fork stuck in it...so i think i'll make like a baby and head on out of here and let mandy have the last word (it makes him feel better)...y'all take care!

-hcw

 

[mandrin]

#115

-- To a certain extend it is a bit strange that one could consider seriously to be able to change, compensate or control anything during a fleeting instant of 0.0004 to 0.0005 sec --

interestingly, you are the only person i have ever heard suggest that anyone considers this as possible!

hcw, back again to the arduous business of working on your education which has some big holes in it.

There are indeed TGM forums happily espousing the concept of impact deceleration and I am not surprised to see you having zero reading and comprehension skills. Just today, Brian Manzella, in post #115, discusses the very concept you seem to ignore completely. Just some lines from Brian's post below to help you get a running start.

“I have been a STAUNCH believer in "resistance to deceleration." Made sense to me.”

“So, in golf, us "Golfing Machiners" have been sold/told that if we resist impact "decel" with proper alignments and lag pressure, we would hit it farther.”

I hope that you accept Brian as an expert on TGM, fully aware what is going on ‘elsewhere’. It is very clear that Brian refers to resisting impact deceleration as being part of TGM philosophy.

Considering what Brian states in his post #115 and what indeed is generally accepted in the TGM world, it should be clear by now that hcw is only out to draw blood in any way possible. I don’t mind it for a while till it all gets so darned repetitive and boring like hell for everyone.

 

[golfbulldog]

Judging by the audience this thread is attracting there seems to be a pretty high interest in the topic. You have to go back to April to find a thread more viewed than this one.

Anyway, leave Mandrin alone, he's in his element here and enjoys the role he plays. The bee in his particular bonnet is that he wants everyone to understand this stuff s clearly as he does. And besides, this has been one of the most educational and thought provoking threads in which I've participated in a long time, on any site.

You mean you guys DON"T hit up on the driver... you just don't know what you're missing... or maybe that's why the RC is "over there", again.

G2M

Don't misunderstand the tone of my message - it was a sincere invitation to explore another area of golfing "science". I like Mandrin, but the thread has run its course ...

Regarding hitting up on driver... do you place the ball in front of "low point" - ie . left shoulder?

 

[tongzilla]

So why does it "work"?

Ok...

For those teachers who DO teach (either directly, or indirectly as part of their teaching philosophy) their students to "resist impact deceleration" or "maintain that heaviness of the clubhead felt through your right forefinger" or "drag that wet mop through impact", etc., and it WORKED, we have to ask ourselves WHY did it work.

In other words, we have established that asking a student to do these things (i.e. maintain Lag Pressure) has a positive side effect on their ball striking, but WHY? Mandrin is saying it is not because we are resisting impact deceleration. Then what is it Mandrin? Can you tell us in scientific terms what effect does this heavy “feel” (even though you feel you are resisting impact deceleration you are not because that cannot be done according to Mandrin…and lets assume you are correct) have in the “real world”?

 

[hcw]

Speaking of Spin

hcw, back again to the arduous business of working on your education which has some big holes in it.

There are indeed TGM forums happily espousing the concept of impact deceleration and I am not surprised to see you having zero reading and comprehension skills. Just today, Brian Manzella, in post #115, discusses the very concept you seem to ignore completely. Just some lines from Brian's post below to help you get a running start...

Considering what Brian states in his post #115 and what indeed is generally accepted in the TGM world, it should be clear by now that hcw is only out to draw blood in any way possible. I don’t mind it for a while till it all gets so darned repetitive and boring like hell for everyone.

Fascinating that you took what I said in post #129 to mean I didn’t think anyone was “espousing the concept of impact deceleration” when that is exactly what I said could happen in my initial post in this thread (#98) and you heartily agreed (post #99). No Mandrin, it’s the idea that you keep putting forth that anyone actually thinks the golfer somehow consciously senses the instant of impact and then reactively does something to resist it before separation occurs. I have never seen anyone else (TGMer or not) propose this. As far as I can tell that interpretaion is yours and yours alone. And I agree that your continued suggestions otherwise do become boring. However, I find it a bit ironic that someone (that would be you Mandrin) who started this thread with two posts about other peoples “gross errors” and “very peculiar statements” should get their knickers in a twist when someone challenges them. Fear not, there are others now asking for your opinions, so I’ll yield the floor to them and your efforts at my erudition can take a break. Go in peace and I’ll take your advice and hit some balls. Cheers!

-hcw

 

[Brian Manzella]

Hooray for Leo Tong(zilla)!!!

Ok...

For those teachers who DO teach (either directly, or indirectly as part of their teaching philosophy) their students to "resist impact deceleration" or "maintain that heaviness of the clubhead felt through your right forefinger" or "drag that wet mop through impact", etc., and it WORKED, we have to ask ourselves WHY did it work.

In other words, we have established that asking a student to do these things (i.e. maintain Lag Pressure) has a positive side effect on their ball striking, but WHY? Mandrin is saying it is not because we are resisting impact deceleration. Then what is it Mandrin? Can you tell us in scientific terms what effect does this heavy “feel” (even though you feel you are resisting impact deceleration you are not because that is cannot be done according to Mandrin…and lets assume you are correct) have in the “real world”?

This is the crux, isn't Leo?

Well folks, I know the answer to this. And I am telling. Video shortly.

Having said that, remember what a "Line of Compression" really is, and then what a GOOD ONE is, knowing that a sweetspot can pass through the ball with different CLUB alignments.

Then, add in what a BAD LOC would be, and how this could easily be mistaken for "NOT Sustaining the LOC ."

You'd be really close.

 

[golf2much]

Nor Mine...

Don't misunderstand the tone of my message - it was a sincere invitation to explore another area of golfing "science". I like Mandrin, but the thread has run its course ...

Regarding hitting up on driver... do you place the ball in front of "low point" - ie . left shoulder?

I'm not nearly as good as others at putting little smiley faces in my posts to indicate the completely tongue in cheek nature of the post. Sorry if it was misunderstood.

On the driver thing, equally TIC, but there is an interesting story to go along... Last week I was on a launch monitor for a new driver fitting, and the guy kept saying my spin was too high (3600) and that I needed to tee the ball higher and "hit up" to increase launch and reduce spin. I wasn't in the mood for a long discussion, so I just worked my way through the lofts and shafts until I got the ball flight I wanted (we were outside). At the end of the session, the guy says... "yeah, your doing much better at hitting up on the ball, your spin numbers are right on now" I said thanks, and left. What did I change? Higher loft, softer shaft, tee higher. I went from a 44 1/2" 8.5* 983K (that measures 8*) with a 757 X Flex to a 45" 905R 9.5* (that measures 10*) with a UST V2 S Flex. Averages for about 6 balls with the final driver were swing speed was 112, 14* launch, ball speed 161, spin 3100, and carry 260 with range balls. My original driver was a 108 SS, 10* launch, 154 ball speed 3600 spin and 252 carry. I knew going in the the 757 X had become too much shaft for my 52 yo body. I was fitted for it when the 983's first came out, and my SS range was then 119 - 122 MPH and through a concious effort at more control and several years of age, I knew my SS wasn't what it once was. Anyway, "hitting up", there was a long thread on another forum with some high speed photos of the pros "hitting up" Only one I saw even approached level.

G2M

G2M

 

[golf2much]

The questions of when, and why...

No Mandrin, it’s the idea that you keep putting forth that the golfer somehow consciously senses the instant of impact and then reactively does something to resist it before separation occurs that is yours and yours alone.
-hcw

This is precisely the point of the discussion. The golfer clearly senses impact, but much like you see the recoil of the gun from a distance before you hear the report, the impact is felt after the ball is gone. A correct 3 dimensional impact generates a unique resonance that travels up the shaft to your hands and is registered in your brain. I think we all agree that you cannot sense this feeling during the actual impact interval, let alone react and make a concious reaction. After all, human reaction time is about 0.75 seconds, the impact interval is only .0005 seconds. Clearly the ball is long gone before you could generate the thoughts and react to what you felt.

Now as to the why.. I'll leave the scientific explanation to Mandrin, but the crux, as Brian has said is about the optimum alignment of all the forces of a correct 3D impact with the desired line of compression. Most can get the x and y right, but the z component of impact is what is addressed in resisting impact, the drag the wet mop and the heavy impact teaching concepts. These concepts work as teaching concepts because they teach the feeling, the correct ressonance of impact that you feel after the ball is gone, of a correctly executed 3 dimmensional impact.

G2M

 

[mandrin]

LAW vs paradox

[size=-2]Ok...

For those teachers who DO teach (either directly, or indirectly as part of their teaching philosophy) their students to "resist impact deceleration" or "maintain that heaviness of the clubhead felt through your right forefinger" or "drag that wet mop through impact", etc., and it WORKED, we have to ask ourselves WHY did it work.

In other words, we have established that asking a student to do these things (i.e. maintain Lag Pressure) has a positive side effect on their ball striking, but WHY? Mandrin is saying it is not because we are resisting impact deceleration. Then what is it Mandrin? Can you tell us in scientific terms what effect does this heavy “feel” (even though you feel you are resisting impact deceleration you are not because that cannot be done according to Mandrin…and lets assume you are correct) have in the “real world”?[/size]

Tongzilla,

Some people have a tendency to twist arguments any direction they see fit. Of which hcw is a perfect example. So let’s put things into perspective once more.

I am not arguing with the feel part of golf instruction. I am arguing with those who proudly drape themselves with the glory of being truly scientific when in effect they are not.

Just recently I found this ‘beautiful’ prose about golf somewhere.

A brilliant man spends 42 years writing a book on golf.
He uses the laws of physics and geometry to develop a machine concept.
He catalogs the human movements to match the machine, not vice versa.
His research IS NOT based on "if it works", it's based on law.
Therefore, if the laws of physics and geometry work for you, then use them.

There are indeed people who believe in being capable of resisting impact since it is written down somewhere. Hence not a simple belief but seemingly real, being LAW.

My views on the role of science in golf are very different indeed and this is very clearly expressed in various posts, the most recent post being # 95, shown below.

Paradox

Brian,
Real is important and definitely has its place in golf but primarily as a supporting role.
What is required is an open mind and an appreciation that feel and real don’t always fit.
But also an appreciation of the paradox that feel is more important than real in golf.

Tongzilla, you mentioned in your post:

“In other words, we have established that asking a student to do these things (i.e. maintain Lag Pressure) has a positive side effect on their ball striking, but WHY? Mandrin is saying it is not because we are resisting impact deceleration”

This is not only twisting the truth, it is simple not true. I never said that resisting impact deceleration has a negative effect on ball striking. To put it very simple – whatever concept, idea or feel helps to better strike the ball is worthwhile.

Whatever benefit comes from heavy feel, dragging wet mops around, etc., is not because it prevents impact deceleration. However that is a totally different debate altogether which I leave gladly to those so interested.

 

[tongzilla]

I never said that resisting impact deceleration has a negative effect on ball striking. Just the other way around.

Whoa...

So resisting impact deceleration DOES have a positive effect on ball striking?

 

[Brian Manzella]

Ok Folks, here is THE ANSWER, by Golf's "Answer Man"

Whoa...

So resisting impact deceleration DOES have a positive effect on ball striking?

Leo, you are smarter than that last post.

Read the following, cuz you ain't gonna get this type of post anywhere else:

You resist by USING "Clubhead sweetspot Lag pressure" to AIM the sweetspot and STRESS the shaft (by pulling or pushing or both), this--along with a PIVOT that CREATES speed and AIMS it as well, puts that SWEETSPOT and the GOLF CLUB in "position" at and through impact. It partially GETS IN this "position" by way of a FORWARD KICKING SHAFT that propels this sweetspot "Through the ball"---the LINE of Compression. When the sweetspot is being propeled by this forward (and downward, AND AROUND-ward [torque]) kicking shaft, the CLUBHEAD at least somewhat acts as if it is "disconnected" to the rest of the club and therefore the golfer.