Clubpaths, and Hogan vs. Tiger 2000

[Dariusz J.]

How is biokinetically ideal measured?

It cannot be measured, alas. It's a theoretical work based on hypotheses concerning the common denominators of the golfers who are commonly accepted as greatest ballstrikers with most repeatable motions. I am here also to find if real scientific measurements (that I am uncapable of running) confirm or deny my findings. Until now, I am happy to say that they do not deny them.

If there is no single real model,how do you know it's optimal?It's got to be based on a real player to get real results otherwise it's just another theory.
So Hogan comes closest to your model,perhaps 99.9%? but he's not the model.That's really splitting hairs don't you think?

Rather something like 90%. It is being based on real players but simply there is no ideal. There are players that can have 10%, 35% or 90% if you like numbers to visualize the situation.

Dariusz,

Which modern golfer's swings do you admire or think may be close to your abstract model?

When I look at today's PGA pros I rarely see a good action - if yes, it is rather a part of the action as e.g. Furyk's downswing, Kuchar's backswing, McCarron's transition or McIlroy's foot work. However, if I am to choose one name overall that is the closest to the BGST ideal it would be this young Italian amateur Manassero, I guess. I repeat, before you lynch me down, my goal is repeatability and consistency.
If my goal is length (who knows maybe I'll change priorities one day), the names will be different.

Cheers

 

[ej20]

Rather something like 90%. It is being based on real players but simply there is no ideal. There are players that can have 10%, 35% or 90% if you like numbers to visualize the situation.



When I look at today's PGA pros I rarely see a good action - if yes, it is rather a part of the action as e.g. Furyk's downswing, Kuchar's backswing, McCarron's transition or McIlroy's foot work. However, if I am to choose one name overall that is the closest to the BGST ideal it would be this young Italian amateur Manassero, I guess. I repeat, before you lynch me down, my goal is repeatability and consistency.
If my goal is length (who knows maybe I'll change priorities one day), the names will be different.

Cheers

Well if a player comes 90% close your ideal theoretical model and no other player alive or dead comes closer,then I think most reasonable people would say that player is your model.What is Hogan not doing that your ideal model does?

As for Mannesero he does not come OTT of his backswing and he does not setup with a diagonal stance.Aren't these some of the cornerstones of your model?

 

[johnnymarlboro]

If there is no single real model,how do you know it's optimal?It's got to be based on a real player to get real results otherwise it's just another theory.

So Hogan comes closest to your model,perhaps 99.9%? but he's not the model.That's really splitting hairs don't you think?

Well to take the other side of your point, why does it have to be based on one single player. Any optimized model is going to take a variety of things into account. Dariusz's is optimized for what he sees as ideal. Do you think Brian and Michael's research is based on one player?

 

[spmurph]

What scientific measurements support your hypotheses? FYI, not being critical here. Just interested.

 

[ej20]

Well to take the other side of your point, why does it have to be based on one single player. Any optimized model is going to take a variety of things into account. Dariusz's is optimized for what he sees as ideal. Do you think Brian and Michael's research is based on one player?

Brians research is based on science which to be honest has it's draw backs also.There is never the last word in science history has shown us.

Biomechanics is based on movement patterns that relate to people who perform at a high level.In other words it is fundamentally based on anectodal evidence.How the best performing athletes move is the model for optimisation.Not exactly scientific.

In Dariusz theory,all of those "optimal" movement patterns are based on what Hogan does because being the greatest ballstriker ever must mean his movement pattern is optimised.Diagonal stance,early elbow plane,come OTT from the inside....the list goes on.Blind freddy can see he is basing his theory on Hogan which is fine.Why deny it?

 

[Dariusz J.]

Well if a player comes 90% close your ideal theoretical model and no other player alive or dead comes closer,then I think most reasonable people would say that player is your model.What is Hogan not doing that your ideal model does?

As for Mannesero he does not come OTT of his backswing and he does not setup with a diagonal stance.Aren't these some of the cornerstones of your model?

As per Manassero - noone today use diagonal stance, alas; his downswing plane is over the backswing plane, exactly as Hogan's or Knudson's or Moe's. I said he's the closest overally which does not mean he's very close.

As per Hogan - these 10% are mainly linked to his feelings (described mainly in 5L) and introduction of conscious thougths into the motion. It brings the ideal sequencing from the ground up out of play and makes the motion less setup-dependent and automatic than it should be. An example of stricte biophysical action I consider as suboptimal is presetting only rear ankle and not knee joint fully. To explain it I'd need one page of the Forum here, thus, if you're specially interested in details pm me.

Cheers

 

[Dariusz J.]

In Dariusz theory,all of those "optimal" movement patterns are based on what Hogan does because being the greatest ballstriker ever must mean his movement pattern is optimised.Diagonal stance,early elbow plane,come OTT from the inside....the list goes on.Blind freddy can see he is basing his theory on Hogan which is fine.Why deny it?

Do not put things into my mouth or pretend you know better what I based my theory on, please. I guess I took too much space here for explaining what's my theory is based on.

Cheers

 

[ej20]

Do not put things into my mouth or pretend you know better what I based my theory on, please. I guess I took too much space here for explaining what's my theory is based on.

Cheers

Not putting things into your mouth.

You can clear it up right here right now.Where did you get the idea for the diagonal stance?

 

[ej20]

As per Manassero - noone today use diagonal stance, alas; his downswing plane is over the backswing plane, exactly as Hogan's or Knudson's or Moe's. I said he's the closest overally which does not mean he's very close.

As per Hogan - these 10% are mainly linked to his feelings (described mainly in 5L) and introduction of conscious thougths into the motion. It brings the ideal sequencing from the ground up out of play and makes the motion less setup-dependent and automatic than it should be. An example of stricte biophysical action I consider as suboptimal is presetting only rear ankle and not knee joint fully. To explain it I'd need one page of the Forum here, thus, if you're specially interested in details pm me.

Cheers

Mannesero does not come over the top of his backswing plane.

Matteo Manassero swing - Down the Line - YouTube

 

[Dariusz J.]

Mannesero does not come over the top of his backswing plane.

Matteo Manassero swing - Down the Line - YouTube

He slightly does (slightly as Hogan did). It's visible with a V1 programme, not with bare eye.

Image - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting

Not putting things into your mouth.

You can clear it up right here right now.Where did you get the idea for the diagonal stance?

From my researches based on anatomy and physics. Also via experimenting. Ask yourself what your subbconscious mind do with your stance to secure maximal effectiveness if your goal is located West and you must face North. Imagine you need to hammer a nail on the wall left and watch with what stance you will end.

Cheers

 

[dbl]

ej20 you do sound like you are putting words in Dariusz mouth, and to me your insistence that a golfer who fits 90% of a model IS the standard for the model is an unnecessary adaptation of your thinking to the model and thinking of others (including the readers) and detracts from the value you are trying to input here.

As to the diagonal stance it predates Hogan, so no real revelation there...

 

[ej20]

He slightly does (slightly as Hogan did). It's visible with a V1 programme, not with bare eye.

Image - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting



From my researches based on anatomy and physics. Also via experimenting. Ask yourself what your subbconscious mind do with your stance to secure maximal effectiveness if your goal is located West and you must face North. Imagine you need to hammer a nail on the wall left and watch with what stance you will end.

Cheers

Dariusz,Mannesero does not come over the top of his backswing.That video is shot from too far behind.From this angle all swings look OTT.Have you heard of parallax?You need to choose a video that has the camera pointed down where he has laid a club on the ground.Please do that and come back to us.

 

[ej20]

ej20 you do sound like you are putting words in Dariusz mouth, and to me your insistence that a golfer who fits 90% of a model IS the standard for the model is an unnecessary adaptation of your thinking to the model and thinking of others (including the readers) and detracts from the value you are trying to input here.

As to the diagonal stance it predates Hogan, so no real revelation there...

I am compelled to repeat a quote from another thread that was posted not long ago.

"The truth, indeed, is something that mankind, for some mysterious reason, instinctively dislikes. Every man who tries to tell it is unpopular, and even when, by the sheer strength of his case, he prevails, he is put down as a scoundrel." - HL Mencken

 

[Dariusz J.]

As to the diagonal stance it predates Hogan, so no real revelation there...

Of course, the concept is old as humanity, I guess. Not only Hogan, also Knudson, Moe, etc.

Dariusz,Mannesero does not come over the top of his backswing.That video is shot from too far behind.From this angle all swings look OTT.Have you heard of parallax?You need to choose a video that has the camera pointed down where he has laid a club on the ground.Please do that and come back to us.

Here you are:

Image - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting

Cheers

 

[ej20]

Of course, the concept is old as humanity, I guess. Not only Hogan, also Knudson, Moe, etc.



Here you are:

Image - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting

Cheers

I am supposed to accept a handpath line that you have drawn on a still pic is accurate?Even if it is accurate which I doubt,that is so minimal given it's a 2D video,it is splitting hairs to the extreme.

Anyway I didn't know you meant OTT hand path.I though you meant the plane.That is a very,very controversial theory you have proposed especially in this forum.You are basically proposing an inside to outside loop with the hands.

 

[natep]

What's so controversial about it? Lots of people do it, Manzella himself does it. An OTT downswing handpath is only relative to backswing handpath. They talk about prescribing "carry" a lot around here, I would presume it would have the same effect.

 

[johnnymarlboro]

What's so controversial about it? Lots of people do it, Manzella himself does it. An OTT downswing handpath is only relative to backswing handpath. They talk about prescribing "carry" a lot around here, I would presume it would have the same effect.

That's what I got out of it as well.

 

[ej20]

What's so controversial about it? Lots of people do it, Manzella himself does it. An OTT downswing handpath is only relative to backswing handpath. They talk about prescribing "carry" a lot around here, I would presume it would have the same effect.

Ok so whats so new about that?Have a flat inside backswing,come over the top of that but on plane.Why put a new spin on it?

 

[ej20]

They talk about downward handpath ala Sergio a lot around here also.That was what I was referring to.

 

[Dariusz J.]

I am supposed to accept a handpath line that you have drawn on a still pic is accurate?Even if it is accurate which I doubt,that is so minimal given it's a 2D video,it is splitting hairs to the extreme.

Anyway I didn't know you meant OTT hand path.I though you meant the plane.That is a very,very controversial theory you have proposed especially in this forum.You are basically proposing an inside to outside loop with the hands.

Geez...it's hard for some guys to admit they were wrong...LOL. It is not a still photo but the line was drawn actually on a moving picture via V1 programme tool, thus, it is pretty accurate.
The theory is not controversial, IMO. Even Hogan mentioned that the downswing plane must be shallower than the backswing one. The loop happens unintentionally thanks to subconscious mind and the explanation why it happens is a bliss for everyday's hackers who are constantly being cucified as OTTers and usually end with severe goat humping, poor pivot, loss of power and uncontrollable shots.

Cheers