BLOG: Let's List All the Scientifcally Correct Concepts in The Golfing Machine

[birly-shirly]

I'm somewhat new to TGM, but things I'd like to see scientifically validated (ie I have my doubts) are:

compression - in as much as it suggests that anything other than clubhead speed and CoG alignments matter;

distinction between hitting and swinging - in as much as this suggests that the application of weight or force at impact can compensate for slower clubhead speed;

hinge technique - in as much as this suggests that different shots might result from the same clubhead alignment at impact/separation;

the magic of the right forearm

 

[Brian Manzella]

What about centrifugal force?

What did Aaron Zick say about it?

To start with, I really wouldn't do it justice. Aaron Zick is a brilliant, brilliant, man.

The simplified version is this, Centrifugal Force is a fictitious force, but what we call the force other wise know as Centrifugal Force, is created as much from the GOLFER pulling UP THE GRIP on the club as anything else.

Does centripetal force create centrifugal reaction? )ie a force towards the centre creates a force away from the centre)

Not the way we commonly think about it, I'll have to interview Zick on camera with a list of questions.

Does centrifugal force contribute greatly to the expanding of the lever assembley or is it more the work of muscular force such as straightening the right arm and applying a lot of force through PP#1.

The torques from the SHOULDERS, from the HANDS with an assist from the arms, do as much as the body, but an exact "foot pounds" amount is something I have to ask him.

Surely the tighter and more effecient a players rotation the more speed the rotation creates and the faster the most distal point of the lever moves ie mph. Is this not a well timed kinematic sequence?

The "tightness" of the rotation doesn't add as much as the rotation itself.

I asked him once about keeping the arms close to increase rotation speed, which of course—it does (he agrees).

He said it was WAY, WAY MORE IMPORTANT to speed/power to have the force across the shaft applied at the right time.

This would alter the release point and hand path of a player.

No.

The hand path is always circular, and the release point IN ANY POWERFUL SWING is as non-Automatic as pulling a slot machine lever.

I know that the endless belt is not accurate but as a concept it helps explain this relationship between delivery of the power package and a players body rotation. It's all about timing

The endless belt is total B.S.

But, everything about hitting the ball, and where low point is, is all about TIMING!!!

 

[Brian Manzella]

Centripital & Centrifugal forces exist in the GOLF SWING...

He felt that the CP and CF releases were mis-named, and over simplified.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Just curious has anyone proven Dr. Aaron Zick wrong? ...has this man been debated yet?

Wanna take a shot?

Better you then me.

The math is over ANY golf pro's head.

 

[Brian Manzella]

compression - in as much as it suggests that anything other than clubhead speed and CoG alignments matter

The biggest lie in golf pseudo-science.

A hacker swinging a driver 88 mph, delivering 22° of loft, hitting down 4°, path of 1° out, face of 0.5° open, sweetspot contact, compresses the ball every bit as much as Bubba Watson doing it with a de-lofted 6-iron with the same impact alignments.

Get it?

...distinction between hitting and swinging

Total junk.

You can "swing" as prescribed, it will go no more than 85% of your potential power. Hitting will give you way less then that.

Nobody ever measured did either to any degree of even SORT-of-Pure.

hinge technique - in as much as this suggests that different shots might result from the same clubhead alignment at impact/separation;

Horizontal Hinge Action has NEVER BEEN MEASURED even close to what it is supposed to be.

Plus, the club only closes about a half degree max during the impact interval.

the magic of the right forearm

It ain't magic.

 

[Jay845]

Wanna take a shot?

Better you then me.

The math is over ANY golf pro's head.

Brian, is the math over all other Physicist's heads? I actually think that is what the original poster was referring to.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Brian, is the math over all other Physicist's heads? I actually think that is what the original poster was referring to.

I am pretty sure all the engineers and physicists learned the same math.

That's what I was saying.

 

[siksta]

I am pretty sure all the engineers and physicists learned the same math.

Thanks Brian just wanted to make sure these guys were on the same page.


So isnt this why Clampett,O Grady and others left the machine because of the flaws didnt they see this stuff years ago these guys were in the trenches playing i suspect they figured it out before Zick ?

These guys distinguished hitting and swinging patterns different from the so called TGM experts today?

Trevino,Hogan, and many others were swinging left with irons long ago this is a diff pattern than dumping arms out to rt field?

 

[birly-shirly]

query - can the plane line be actually bent in a way that matters? or is the clubhead and its arc through the lower part of the swing (say, for sake of argument, 2 feet either side of the ball) a prisoner of the clubhead's accumulated momentum and centrifugal force?

obviously, the plane line can be (and frequently is) misaligned - but has anyone measured or captured (3D motion analysis?) a bent plane line?

 

[Brian Manzella]

query - can the plane line be actually bent in a way that matters? or is the clubhead and its arc through the lower part of the swing (say, for sake of argument, 2 feet either side of the ball) a prisoner of the clubhead's accumulated momentum and centrifugal force?

obviously, the plane line can be (and frequently is) misaligned - but has anyone measured or captured (3D motion analysis?) a bent plane line?

A plane line—horizontal plane angle—can NOT be bent.

Period.

 

[birly-shirly]

A plane line—horizontal plane angle—can NOT be bent.

Period.

Brian - if you mean that geometrically the intersection of two flat planes must be a straight line, then of course that is true. That's schoolboy geometry.

My question was in relation to the TGM imperative of a straight plane line. It wouldn't make sense to list this as an imperative if it were impossible to not have a straight plane line - although I suppose a more correct way of expressing this would be in terms of a shift in plane during the lower arc of the swing. But I think it's reasonable, in fact inevitable, to infer that Homer thought that a plane line could be bent.

I'm still not sure myself that it's possible to shift planes (or, in TGM parlance, "bend" the plane line") once the wrists are starting to uncock. Are you saying that it's not?

 

[Brian Manzella]

Brian - if you mean that geometrically the intersection of two flat planes must be a straight line, then of course that is true. That's schoolboy geometry.

Not for book literalists.

My question was in relation to the TGM imperative of a straight plane line. It wouldn't make sense to list this as an imperative if it were impossible to not have a straight plane line - although I suppose a more correct way of expressing this would be in terms of a shift in plane during the lower arc of the swing. But I think it's reasonable, in fact inevitable, to infer that Homer thought that a plane line could be bent.

The answer is slightly more difficult to explain.

It turns out that the plane line is only a plane line late in the downswing.

The club starts down with all sorts of parallel-like movements, and then slightly shifts to pointing at a line.

By that time, there ain't any bending gonna happen.

I'm still not sure myself that it's possible to shift planes (or, in TGM parlance, "bend" the plane line") once the wrists are starting to uncock. Are you saying that it's not?

You can change plane ANGLES after release begins.

 

[birly-shirly]

Not for book literalists.

I hear ya!

The answer is slightly more difficult to explain.

It turns out that the plane line is only a plane line late in the downswing.

The club starts down with all sorts of parallel-like movements, and then slightly shifts to pointing at a line.

By that time, there ain't any bending gonna happen.



You can change plane ANGLES after release begins.

OK thanks - I think I got what you're saying. An example of a change in plane angle (but not a bent plane line) would be raising the handle through impact so that the shaft is steeper, but still pointing at the straight plane line. Is that correct?

 

[rainbow_in_the_dark]

Did Homer get ball flight laws right?

 

[Kevin Shields]

I hear ya!




OK thanks - I think I got what you're saying. An example of a change in plane angle (but not a bent plane line) would be raising the handle through impact so that the shaft is steeper, but still pointing at the straight plane line. Is that correct?

Thats correct.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Did Homer get ball flight laws right?

Hell no.

He whiffed on the resultant path of the "U plane."

And, was only close on path-to-face.

 

[rainbow_in_the_dark]

The most lasting thing to me from TGM, was not allowing the clubhead to pass the hands on the DS, because it will have a natural tendency to slow down to establish an inline relationship, and the attendant problems this will cause. Is that still held up as true?

 

[gmbtempe]

The most lasting thing to me from TGM, was not allowing the clubhead to pass the hands on the DS, because it will have a natural tendency to slow down to establish an inline relationship, and the attendant problems this will cause. Is that still held up as true?

nope...plenty of good players can overcome that....next