Acceleration of clubhead

Status
Not open for further replies.
Only a fool thinks he knows everything.

does this mean that everything the amazing mandrin tells us is NOT the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?...shocked, shocked i am!

We are lucky to have hcw around with his frequent and long awaited brilliant and significant contributions to the discussions. :confused:

I am sure that many share my opinion that you should definitely post more frequently, why hide such brilliant light under a bushel. :rolleyes:

I am looking forward to any idea you might possibly have not posted yet, don’t be shy; I won’t be too hard on you. :D
 
Well, I don't think I used the word dominant but I'm just vetting this theory. It' s a learning experience either way. Again, the premise here is achieving maximum clubhead speed which is what I gather many of the posters have been after with this thread.

Anyway, yes robots can achieve, I assume, normal swing speeds with no roll but to me that doesn't mean that humans are most effective that way.

Instructors that teach minimal role may be after more accuracy than distance, I don't know. If so, that's probably better for amateurs anyway. But, after looking at few long hitters swings this weekend (Bubba Watson, Tiger) they have a healthy roll of the wrists late in the swing.

It also could be that it's a better swing thought. I will admit that when I feel like I'm minimizing my forearm roll (at least on the backswing), I can achieve relatively high swing speeds so maybe it's a feel vs real thing also.

But, indeed, I may be missing the cause and effect link. Is the roll an effect vs a cause in your opinion?

Jay
jmessner,

If roll is a conscious deliberate action do you feel that a golfer could time it with the extraordinary precision required to have the correct club face alignments at impact?

I feel that this can only be truly the case if, like the release action, it is an action largely controlled by purely mechanical factors and not controlled by the golfer.

Have a look at some posts ( #1 , #2 ) I have done some time ago where there is evidence of a self regulating action which greatly helps a golfer obtain correct impact conditions.

I admit readily that active roll can be a conscious deliberate speed producing factor; but is it the best approach? I am curious what Brian and his staff think about this matter.
 
jmessner,

If roll is a conscious deliberate action do you feel that a golfer could time it with the extraordinary precision required to have the correct club face alignments at impact?

I feel that this can only be truly the case if, like the release action, it is an action largely controlled by purely mechanical factors and not controlled by the golfer.

Have a look at some posts ( #1 , #2 ) I have done some time ago where there is evidence of a self regulating action which greatly helps a golfer obtain correct impact conditions.

I admit readily that active roll can be a conscious deliberate speed producing factor; but is it the best approach? I am curious what Brian and his staff think about this matter.

mandrin-

Thanks for the links. Link #2 is very interesting related to roll of the forearm discussion. My thinking was that the longer a swing could delay the wrist release and start the roll with a larger wrist cock angle, there was a possibility of increased clubhead speed due to the longer arc. Your model suggests that the roll doesn't occur until a good deal of the wrist angle is lost, so if that's truly the case, the roll may not play as large a roll in generating clubhead speed.

All that said, I am completely in agreement that a golfer could not really conciously use or manipulate the roll during the swing. I was more thinking that a teacher could use his/her teaching methods to encourage these positions during a swing if maximum speed was desired. It also could have some ramifications of hitting vs swinging since, as I understand it, the hitter would rotate earlier in the downswing.

Jay
 
Ok, I'm hoping Brian's response to this was sarcastic because while I don't agree with Ringer's Physics, I'm starting to think the rolling is an important part of the release. If you think about it, the rolling has a bigger impact on clubhead speed with a larger wrist cock angle since the club will trace a larger arc when rotated. So a swing that exhibits a delayed wrist cock AND delayed forearm rotation has real potential for speed. Of course, I haven't done any math on this yet, so I could be all wet.

jm,

Rolling the club (I am presuming you are meaning the right forearm rolls over the left thro the hitting area...:)) will only add significant C/H speed if the left wrist remains cocked, with a reasonable angle between the left arm and clubshaft.
Once the left wrist goes into ulna deviation (knuckles of left hand pointing at the ground - clubshaft more or less in line with the left arm) rolling the arms adds very little to the C/H speed...BUT wrist action, going from a bowed left wrist, to a cupped left wrist, will add speed to the C/H.

Therefore you either do one or the other, but both is pointless.....
 
does this mean that everything the amazing mandrin tells us is NOT the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?...shocked, shocked i am!

This is, to me, the defining property of a scientist.

Consider for a moment the following quotes from Carl Sagan:

"In science it often happens that scientists say, "You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken," and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion."

"At the heart of science is an essential tension between two seemingly contradictory attitudes — an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new. This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense."

This is *exactly* as it should be. I have been laughing for months at the tension mandrin and nm cause in others here and on other boards. I can guarantee this: it is one sided. They don't feel the same angst. They are just being scientists. They advocate a position that seems logical, run experiments (real or thought), analyze the results, and reformulate the hypothesis if necessary. It is easy for them to abandon old, flawed ideas. There is very little emotion in the process. Yet, it stirs up hurt feelings all around them.

This attitude, by the way, is why I chose Brian as my swing coach. There is a scientist inside Brian just dying to get out. Strangely, it is Brian himself that is holding it inside. Let it out, Brian, let it out!
 
I think nmgolfer's posts on what actually creates the release deserves some attention. It was a very interesting read actually.
 

Jim Kobylinski

Super Moderator
I have a question:

I have an elastic band. I start to 'whirl' it around my head like a lasso. As i whirl it, the circle that the band is traveling on (it's arc i guess) gets bigger and bigger as i whirl the band faster.

how is that happening?
 
This is, to me, the defining property of a scientist.

Consider for a moment the following quotes from Carl Sagan:

"In science it often happens that scientists say, "You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken," and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion."

"At the heart of science is an essential tension between two seemingly contradictory attitudes — an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new. This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense."

This is *exactly* as it should be. I have been laughing for months at the tension mandrin and nm cause in others here and on other boards. I can guarantee this: it is one sided. They don't feel the same angst. They are just being scientists. They advocate a position that seems logical, run experiments (real or thought), analyze the results, and reformulate the hypothesis if necessary. It is easy for them to abandon old, flawed ideas. There is very little emotion in the process. Yet, it stirs up hurt feelings all around them.

This attitude, by the way, is why I chose Brian as my swing coach. There is a scientist inside Brian just dying to get out. Strangely, it is Brian himself that is holding it inside. Let it out, Brian, let it out!
“Let it out, Brian, let it out! …..”

Well here it is:

Smart guys welcome here.

Mandrin and I don't always see "eye-to-eye."

But, he is a very bright guy, and he has never accused me of being a bully, bullied, low IQ, uneducated, megalomaniac or unloved.

So, Mandrin, you and REAL science always have a home right here on the best golf instruction forum on the web.

BrianManzella.com”



photonn,

Let me just for your kind consideration remind you of Brian’s opinion expressed clearly on several occasions, being a better teacher due to mandrin’s scientific contributions. :)

Let me also remind you that Brian has clearly admitted that he has completely changed his opinion due to mandrin’s scientific posts. :D

Therefore, following your logic, he is not much of a teacher, he is just saying anything and changing opinions without emotion and consideration for the hurt feelings it stirs up. :confused:

With regard to hurt feelings I seemingly stir up all around me. I can assure you receiving plenty of PM's about my posts being very entertaining, informative, etc.. :p

It is comical that eventually always someone like photonn comes along making an enormous overkill with some pompous philosophical statement about what science is all about. :eek:

Such a naive overkill for a golf forum from a frustrated science basher, trying to fish for some brownie points at the same time. :rolleyes:
 

hcw

New
look out below!

“Let it out, Brian, let it out! …..”

Well here it is:

Smart guys welcome here.

Mandrin and I don't always see "eye-to-eye."

But, he is a very bright guy, and he has never accused me of being a bully, bullied, low IQ, uneducated, megalomaniac or unloved.

So, Mandrin, you and REAL science always have a home right here on the best golf instruction forum on the web.

BrianManzella.com”


photonn,

Let me just for your kind consideration remind you of Brian’s opinion expressed clearly on several occasions, being a better teacher due to mandrin’s scientific contributions. :)

Let me also remind you that Brian has clearly admitted that he has completely changed his opinion due to mandrin’s scientific posts. :D

Therefore, following your logic, he is not much of a teacher, he is just saying anything and changing opinions without emotion and consideration for the hurt feelings it stirs up. :confused:

With regard to hurt feelings I seemingly stir up all around me. I can assure you receiving plenty of PM's about my posts being very entertaining, informative, etc.. :p

It is comical that eventually always someone like photonn comes along making an enormous overkill with some pompous philosophical statement about what science is all about. :eek:

Such a naive overkill for a golf forum from a frustrated science basher, trying to fish for some brownie points at the same time. :rolleyes:


uh oh, photonn, now you did it, you hurt mandy's feelings...which is pretty ironic as i'm fairly sure you meant your post to compliment him....after seeing the above, do you want to reconsider your thesis that mandrin doesn't have any pent up golf angst!?

-hcw

ps- mandy, nice use of third person, what's next the "royal we"!?:)
 
uh oh, photonn, now you did it, you hurt mandy's feelings...which is pretty ironic as i'm fairly sure you meant your post to compliment him....after seeing the above, do you want to reconsider your thesis that mandrin doesn't have any pent up golf angst!?

-hcw

ps- mandy, nice use of third person, what's next the "royal we"!?:)
hcw,

Your posts are always so inspiring, can’t wait for the next one. :D
 
uh oh, photonn, now you did it, you hurt mandy's feelings...which is pretty ironic as i'm fairly sure you meant your post to compliment him....after seeing the above, do you want to reconsider your thesis that mandrin doesn't have any pent up golf angst!?
-hcw
ps- mandy, nice use of third person, what's next the "royal we"!?:)
photonn,

People like hcw have there usefulness. They hang around like scavengers always on the look out, but this time he is indeed correct, I made an error in judgment. I like to thank hcw for pointing it out so gently. :D
 
I have a question:

I have an elastic band. I start to 'whirl' it around my head like a lasso. As i whirl it, the circle that the band is traveling on (it's arc i guess) gets bigger and bigger as i whirl the band faster.

how is that happening?
Jim,

If I really could explain the exact nature of inertia force I would be a sure candidate for the Nobel Prize in Physics. I would than likely also be capable of explaining that mysterious gravity force as well. As so often science looks at things, describes but not necessarily explains.

It is indeed bizarre the way inertial forces remain a mucky and conflictual subject in science. During Newton’s time it was indeed a very hard struggle to come very slowly over time to grasp with the concepts of mass, force, momentum, inertia. Yet another 300 yeas later it is not all that much different.

For instance, inertial forces, during Stalin’s reign were condemned to be wrong concepts and scientists not treating them according to the official party science were considered ideological enemies and some were indeed persecuted.

Jim, let’s just forget about all this mucky conflictual information. Just between the two of us we are going to see what we can make of this mysterious inertial force, of which centrifugal force is one specific manifestation.

The inherent nature of inertial forces is that they last only as long as there is some motion. A car stuck in heavy snow has no inertial force. However it will resist stubbornly when trying to set it into motion. A golf ball will only exert an inertial force when crushing the skull of a poor spectator as long as it has motion.

Earthquakes, tornadoes, tsunami waves, typhoons, are all capable of producing huge damage solely due to having massive amount of motion. A tsunami wave once it finds an obstacle in its way becomes a darned vicious and mortal destructive inertial force. Yet to make things mucky as usual text books frequently refer to them as fictitious forces, not making the necessary and required distinction about reference frames.

Back to the business of our poor little golf ball, hopefully enjoying himself at the end of your elastic band. The golf ball is in motion so we are from our reasoning above also expecting a manifestation of some form of inertial force.

Let’s do it the homocentric way. The golf ball like human beings is basically inert, lazy and hates to be forcefully set into motion. It likes to get away from that annoying irritating piece of elastic pulling him constantly towards a center. It resists valiantly with its secret weapon, its inertial force.

The elastic band wants to impose itself and without any pity or regard for the feelings of the golf ball keeps pulling hard to keep that damned stubborn golf ball towards the center.

Since nature usually likes to balance things the struggle ends up in a perfect draw. As hard as the elastic band is pulling in as hard is the ball fleeing away from that center. It is like a rat race, like a snake frantically trying to bite its tale and yet just can’t manage it.

The harder the elastic band pulls on the ball the more the ball resists with its inertial force. A larger force means that the elastic band needs to stretch a bit, allowing the ball a bit more space away from the center.

Don’t get mistaken on the apparent very peaceful appearance of the circular motion. It is in effect concealing a fierce continuous battle going on between a center seeking force (centripetal) and a center fleeing force (centrifugal) keeping a continuous dynamic yin and yang type balance.

Jim, in a nutshell, we really don't know how to explain the intrinsic nature of inertial force. Let's just simply accept that it is there. It is indeed very real in its multiple manisfestations. If I find an explanation I am afraid that I will not post it on this forum -a potential Nobel Prize idea merits a different type of forum. ;)
 

hcw

New
Always glad to be of service....

photonn,
People like hcw have there usefulness. They hang around like scavengers always on the look out, but this time he is indeed correct, I made an error in judgment.

not bad mandy, not bad...couldn't quite actually bring yourself to apologize, just like you couldn't actually quite say "Gee, I think I was wrong about something." to nm earlier in the thread, but baby steps at first, eh?

I like to thank hcw for pointing it out so gently. :D

...you're welcome, it was much gentler than the can of angst-laden WA you unleashed on photonn wasn't it?:)
 

Bronco Billy

New member
Wrong...

On another note...Mandrin you are one condescending SOB. Its apparent that I and a whole lot of others are much better educated than you on matters scientific. Let me guess... you're a "drafter" or tech-aid like homer was..

Hi nm

I'm Bettin the Guys a Physics Instructor from Russia..... The Dude Writes Like Tolstoy..... Some of His Latest Dissertations on Inertia etc. are Pretty Cool.....

Cheers
 

neil

New
Jim,

You definitely should not be intimidated. Don’t get impressed.

Many (pseudo) 'scientists' don’t understand half of what they advance.

There is often plenty of action producing noise with empty drums. :D

And drums with empty noise!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top