Club Path - Clubhead Speed
- Thread starter cwdlaw223
- Start date
- Status
Half serious question, did your balls have reflectors?
My balls don't need reflectors! Some things are so big they can always be seen!!!!
I used reflectors.
Last edited:
starchuk
New
the reflective dot also has to point in the direction of the target. the settings for indoor mode require some work, such entering the distance the unit is from the ball, how high the ball is raised off the ground if you're off a mat, and indoor or long indoor mode. This is given you're running the latest firmware on your unit. send me a pm if you need any help.
GeoffDickson
New
nope....error in the spin reading is my guess
I agree 100%. In my experience it is relatively common to get spin misreads. They are noticeable in so far as they are usually 50% or 25% of the usual reading. The net result is slightly longer carry distance and a vastly inflated total distance.
FWIW, my longest shots are definitely pull hooks. I can't get the ball to go as far with hitting a dead straight ball. In addition to clubhead speed I think the pull-hook swing delofts the club by a degree, which also seems to help. Smash factor also at its highest with these pull hooks.
GeoffDickson
New
Art, I have had success this last week with creating/ensuring 'lordosis' and 'fanny back' this last week.
Lordosis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This was the old address position: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBsViwYfRVo
This is the new address position: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgKrriB3c14
They feel like chalk and cheese and I really like my new emphasis on 'lordosis' and 'fanny back'
Last edited:
dschultz6072
New
Is 1.24 high smash factor with an 8 iron?
brian ridley
New
I have owned a flightscope for 13months now,i use it daily working with players of all standards including professionals! I must agree with Art's first paragraph! you state in the OP that you 'nutted' this 8 iron yet the smash factor (1.24) and the launch angle of 18deg and ball-spin 3090 rpm would tell a different story! Would be interested in Mike Jacobs interpretation of these numbers!
tongzilla
New
art- your suggestion for lordosis at address- seems like tour pros these days have a much "straighter" back (i.e. more lordosis) than pros in the past...so you prefer this modern day look right? However I noticed that almost all good players lose this lordosis at impact (that's what it looks like on video anyway).
lia41985
New member
Maestro. No faux. Hello!
Like I said, your English is just fine.
Thanks as always for your insight. Very keen, why were we ever mean? Kna mean?
lia41985
New member
Ain't gonna hit and hold too many tour greens, that's for dang sure. Stinger? Nah...thinned, kinda badly, for real.
Dear Goeff,
What a wonderful world we live in, you are 'half an earth' away, and I get to see you in person with the click of a 'mouse' ???
Well, even more good news is in store for you, if you just make a 1-2 inch change using your second video as the NEW baseline.
Its simple; just for your final set-up position before starting your back swing, rotate your right hip clockwise so that in video #3, the belt loop AND those fancy white stripes on the sweatpants visibly show this new, and final Geoff set-up position.
I predict, and bet both distance/club head velocity will improve, AND the slight pull to the left I think I detect will disappear.
Happy New Year, and thanks for your constant trust and support of my hypotheses, trying hard to become fact and truth.
Sincerely,
art
Lia -
I didn't thin the shot I posted. I nutted the shot. I agree the numbers are goofy. I suspect more room was needed from the ball until the screen. I fly my 8 iron 160 and don't expect 175 yard carry with an 8 iron absent a flier, downwind or downhill. If the setup isn't optimal the numbers won't be optimal. These machines are sensitive. Of course, I don't start railing against Fscope and run to Arizona to have a line drawing a thon because the numbers weren't jiving. I like Fscope and Tman. I suspect the X2 is a very, very good device, but I have yet to hit balls on that machine.
I didn't thin the shot I posted. I nutted the shot. I agree the numbers are goofy. I suspect more room was needed from the ball until the screen. I fly my 8 iron 160 and don't expect 175 yard carry with an 8 iron absent a flier, downwind or downhill. If the setup isn't optimal the numbers won't be optimal. These machines are sensitive. Of course, I don't start railing against Fscope and run to Arizona to have a line drawing a thon because the numbers weren't jiving. I like Fscope and Tman. I suspect the X2 is a very, very good device, but I have yet to hit balls on that machine.
Last edited:
Dear tongzilla,
Thanks for your observations and all your informative and constructive previous posts.
I agree with you about the lordosis appearing to being gone at impact, but it did its MAJOR job of increasing dynamic balance up until that time.
Also, the instantaneous screw axis of rotation of the lower body is rapidly moving from near the right hip joint towards the left (forward) hip joint from just impact into the follow-thru where lordosis, and lower body dynamic balance less critical.
On a related but new subject for me to post, I have read and applied the details of Dr. Serge Gracovetsky's "Spine Engine" theory, BUT with regard to increasing dynamic balance and control FROM WHICH I hypothesize, more power can be generated (from better balance), NOT just the engine itself generating more power.
Hope this helps a little,
Regards,
art
dschultz6072
New
Grandpa driver shot numbers. Maybe there was a reason Penick didn't particularly like indoor hitting facilities into a net.
GeoffDickson
New
I will say it is wonderful world. Fancy living in the antipodes and getting to interact wit the sharpest tools in the (American) shed.
Your suggestion above is simply the BB part of BBKIB?
I am on sabbatical from my university over the next few months. Lots of work to do, but alot of flexibility to hit balls (in front of a flightscope). Do you fancy conducting a few 'single case' experiments?
tongzilla
New
Appreciate your thoughts art.
Taking a step back and thinking about this, I know of good players (not tour caliber though) who seem to be out of balance with their feet on a different footprint after they have swung the club, but somehow can hit it where they're looking and get around the course. I remember Brian saying long time ago (correct me if I'm wrong Brian) his dad moved his feet all over the place when he hit the ball, and he played pretty ok. I'm thinking there is more to playing great golf than balance, and is there more to balance than minimizing movement and maximizing stability. The presumption of all this discussion is increasing stability and balance of body = increase consistency of clubhead and ball impact dynamics. I question that. Ben Doyle used to say balance is conter-balance. I see players like Hogan who looks like they are making a deliberate effort to increase stability on the ground with various torques on the body and feet before taking the club back. I also see players like Freddie Couples who seems relaxed as ever at address and not caring to add any extra stability before hitting the ball.
Taking a step back and thinking about this, I know of good players (not tour caliber though) who seem to be out of balance with their feet on a different footprint after they have swung the club, but somehow can hit it where they're looking and get around the course. I remember Brian saying long time ago (correct me if I'm wrong Brian) his dad moved his feet all over the place when he hit the ball, and he played pretty ok. I'm thinking there is more to playing great golf than balance, and is there more to balance than minimizing movement and maximizing stability. The presumption of all this discussion is increasing stability and balance of body = increase consistency of clubhead and ball impact dynamics. I question that. Ben Doyle used to say balance is conter-balance. I see players like Hogan who looks like they are making a deliberate effort to increase stability on the ground with various torques on the body and feet before taking the club back. I also see players like Freddie Couples who seems relaxed as ever at address and not caring to add any extra stability before hitting the ball.
Dear tongzilla,
Addressing this subject of dynamic balance and stability margin in the golf swing 'quantitatively' can not be done by observation, and requires recorded data at relatively high frequency response rates. This is because, the down swing usually take around 0.250-0.300 seconds, and it is necessary to 'see' data changing at least as frequently as once every 0.010 seconds, or 100 cycles per second.
As for the feet moving, and the apparent shot still being OK, here is what I have found so far.
If the lead foot is elevated in the back swing, it MUST return to a stable and fixed position NEAR to where it left the ground WELL BEFORE IMPACT. If not, involuntary reflex movements occur as the human body switches it's safety/survival balance systems from the proprioceptors in mostly the lead ankle, to a new reference system with much less accurate gravity seeking capability, focused around the overall bodies center of mass/gravity.
So, while lifting the lead foot seems like a good idea, the swings that result contain significantly more potential position and path error content. However, if you are lucky enough to have a Trackman or FlightScope available, you will 'see' these errors in elevated 'dispersion/standard deviation calculations of most ALL the parameters for multiple swings (hopefully, 5-10 for statistical significance).
As for trying to 'see' stability, go to ANY driving range, and I would be very surprised if you did't see well over half the golfers substantially relocating their feet from back swing to 'holding' the follow-thru for at least a few seconds. And, those that move, and relocate their feet , I bet have both reduced distance and accuracy.
Finally, to get the best understanding as to the advers affects of reduced balance, try this. Concentrate looking ONLY at the lead foot of a golfer at your practice facility, and listen attentively for the sound of impact. If the lead foot IS NOT planted and stable, I predict you will always see an errant shot, and subsequently see footsteps after the follow thru to regain stability.
Since a quality golf swing requires club head and club face angular position accuracies and paths of plus or minus 2-3 degrees, this translates to body position accuracies at impact of 1-2 inches, IMO, hard to repeat without dynamic stability.
Sincerely,
art
tongzilla
New
just to be sure art, when you tell me to focus on the lead foot being planted and stable, you mean from address to finish, or from the downswing transition onwards? I'm not sure because history has produced many many great ball strikers who had their lead foot's heel off the ground at some point in their swing.
Frans@France
New
If you see the lead foot moving outwards during downswing you need to ask if they have a knee problem before making any other assumptions about the why and how...
I also agree with tongzilla about history producing great ball striker who lifted the lead foot in the backswing. If I recall correctly from what i have read this "old school" golfswing puts less stress on the lower back?
I also agree with tongzilla about history producing great ball striker who lifted the lead foot in the backswing. If I recall correctly from what i have read this "old school" golfswing puts less stress on the lower back?
- Status