Downswing (WITH AUDIO)
- Thread starter ferrispgm
- Start date
- Status
Brian Manzella
Administrator
She was sitting there....looking at me...like I was nuts....
...of course...she already knows that.
...of course...she already knows that.
Mike, the fact is TOUR players average a 3 degree ASCENDING blow according to Titleists tour dept. Show me pictures all you want, but unless you can find actual numbers from the digital euqipment that these people use, it doesn't mean much. Camera angle can make things look different than they really are. As far as being able to show me 20 who it up to one who hits down goes, I guess those 5% of PGA pros that hit up must hit up a lot to make up for the 95% who hit down, or else it's impossible to reconcile the facts (from the Titleist Tour Dept.), with your opinion.
Here is my post about the science of it all: http://www.manzellagolfforum.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1935&whichpage=6
Go watch an LDA competition some time - They hit up on the ball far more than do PGA pros. That's how they hit the ball 380+ yards. The Swingspeed helps, but the launch conditions do just as much.
What's holding Hank back isn't his driving, it's his ability to play from less than 150 yards. Imagine someone like Jim Furyk, Billy Mayfair or Fred Funk being able to play from Hank's, Scott Hend's or an LDA professional's tee shot...they'd be a top 3-5 player in the world.
Yeah, they'd be playing from the rough more often, but that doesn't matter nearly as much in todays game.
TIGER is 170th in Driving accuracy and he's the number 1 player in the world, so what does it matter if Hanks a little bit behind him? If he had game anywhere other than the tee, he'd be top 10 And Phil Mickelson (who DOES hit down with the driver) is 164th in DA. Explain that.
If you want proof that Driving Distance is more important than driving accuracy, shoot me an email and I'll send you a file to prove it to you (that goes for anyone).
birdie_man
New
haha..
Anyhoo...so here it goes with this topic again eh...
Take it away Brian.
-Paul
Anyhoo...so here it goes with this topic again eh...
Take it away Brian.
-Paul
birdie_man
New
Nm I'll try for now...
-------------------------------------------
Couldn't find the thread with the "It's Over" Audio Answer BTW...it is the thread that originally had what I'm about to show you in it.
Anyhoo...
About Hank...and about tour pros having an average of a 3 degree ascending clubhead at impact...
Go here:
http://www.golfdigest.com/instructi...nstruction/swingsequences/gd200408kuehne.html
Look at the downswing portion of his sequence (bottom of page). Above that there is a "virtual Hank" at impact.
Read the caption: "2.8 deg. upward path".
OK.
But..."clubhead loft is 7.4 degrees at impact, because of forward shaft lean"...it states in the same article that Hank uses a "TaylorMade r7 quad, 9.5 degrees loft."
Copy/pasted from same page...look:
The Kuehne file
Name: Hank Kuehne
Born: Sept. 11, 1975
Birthplace: Dallas, TX
Height, weight: 6-feet-2 205
Driver: TaylorMade r7 quad, 9.5 degrees loft
Ball: Titleist Pro V1x
Clubhead speed: 134 mph Ball speed: 185 mph
Launch angle: 12.3 degrees
2004 average driving distance: 315 yards
The testing was done with Taylormade's high-tech MATT system. It talks about the system in the article.
So...yes, his clubhead IS ascending at impact...but he is hitting down because of forward shaft lean (not many systems measure forward shaft lean).
Loft of driver is changed from 9.5 degrees (statically at address) to 7.4 degrees (at impact). Explain that.
-------------------------------------------
Couldn't find the thread with the "It's Over" Audio Answer BTW...it is the thread that originally had what I'm about to show you in it.
Anyhoo...
About Hank...and about tour pros having an average of a 3 degree ascending clubhead at impact...
Go here:
http://www.golfdigest.com/instructi...nstruction/swingsequences/gd200408kuehne.html
Look at the downswing portion of his sequence (bottom of page). Above that there is a "virtual Hank" at impact.
Read the caption: "2.8 deg. upward path".
OK.
But..."clubhead loft is 7.4 degrees at impact, because of forward shaft lean"...it states in the same article that Hank uses a "TaylorMade r7 quad, 9.5 degrees loft."
Copy/pasted from same page...look:
The Kuehne file
Name: Hank Kuehne
Born: Sept. 11, 1975
Birthplace: Dallas, TX
Height, weight: 6-feet-2 205
Driver: TaylorMade r7 quad, 9.5 degrees loft
Ball: Titleist Pro V1x
Clubhead speed: 134 mph Ball speed: 185 mph
Launch angle: 12.3 degrees
2004 average driving distance: 315 yards
The testing was done with Taylormade's high-tech MATT system. It talks about the system in the article.
So...yes, his clubhead IS ascending at impact...but he is hitting down because of forward shaft lean (not many systems measure forward shaft lean).
Loft of driver is changed from 9.5 degrees (statically at address) to 7.4 degrees (at impact). Explain that.
birdie_man
New
BTW again...I found Brian's original thread on this:
http://www.manzellagolfforum.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1980&SearchTerms=taylor,made,MATT
http://www.manzellagolfforum.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1980&SearchTerms=taylor,made,MATT
OMFG are you kidding me? How can you read a 2.8* upward path and think that there is any possible way the clubhaed is moving in any direction EXCEPT 2.8* up!??!!???!!!???!??!?!? This isn't quantum physics. If it's moving up, it CAN'T be moving down!!!!!!!!!!
the fact is that forward shaft lean and downward blow are NOT THE SAME THING. So YES the club is leaning forward and YES it's moving up. Do i need to draw this out in crayon?
THAT'S the explanation. How about this, you tell me another way that could happen...really, I'd like to hear how the club is moving in a downward angle yet is going up at an angle of 2.8*. It can't!!!
I realize that this isn't the most cordial response I've ever given (and everyone is going to think I'm a jerk), but you've got to be kidding me...that's the kind of logic I'd expect to get from a blonde in-bred woman drunk on moonshine.
Just to map out your "logical" deduction here:
-The club is moving up at 2.8* - fact 1
-The shaft is leaning forward at 2.1* - fact 2
-Forward shaft lean and downward approach angle are the same thing - assumption 1 (which is absolutely inaccurate)
-the club MUST be travelling down - the worst logical deduction I've ever seen. If your deduction makes one of your facts or known truths wrong, it's your assumptions/deduction that is wrong.
Brian, just answer me this: If the shaft is leaning forward and the clubhead is delofted 2.1* (a fact), how on earth can it ALSO be deflected forward 2.8*?
It doesn't make sense Brian. If it was deflected forward 2.8* the effective loft would be 10.2* (9.5-2.1+2.8)...BUT we KNOW it's only 7.4*. You see, it MUST be going up from the grip end, unless somehow the shaft is magically shrinking into impact.
You simply cannot win this arguement in a logical manner.
birdie_man
New
Ahahahahaha...hell no!
I got a laugh tho man.
[EDIT]
BTW this was in response to this post of yours:
Sorry for any misunderstanding.
I got a laugh tho man.
[EDIT]
BTW this was in response to this post of yours:
quote:Originally posted by Abudoggie
Ass-ending?
That must be quite a blow!
Is it struck ascending or descending?
Abudoggie
Sorry for any misunderstanding.
birdie_man
New
OK...I've said it before (in another thread) and I'll say it again...
I think the problem is with the terms "hitting up" and "hitting down".
Some people take that it refers solely to the clubhead moving up or the clubhead moving down. Other people take it as "you- the golfer- is hitting down or up."
I think that's the whole problem.
Brian or someone else who can do it should jump in and explain the geometry of a circle and that the left shoulder is the LOW POINT of that circle, etc.
Briefly: the clubhead orbit traces a circle (no, not oval or anything else- a CIRCLE- the left arm, provided it is straight, is the radius of this circle) around the golfer's LEFT SHOULDER. Anything behind that left shoulder is hitting down- that's the way circles work. That's the jist- not even close to being explained well prolly.
You are right about the clubHEAD- the actual clubHEAD, as a whole is travelling upwards- ass-ending as you say
BUT the KEY thing is that the hands lead the clubhead through impact. Hank is certainly not adding loft at impact, right?
That's the only real important thing in this whole argument anyway.
It all has to do with low point, axis tilt thru impact, geometry of a circle etc.
I don't know how to explain it to you.
Look here, like I told you: http://www.manzellagolfforum.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1980&SearchTerms=taylor,made,MATT
And do a search...there is plenty of information to prove you wrong, believe it or not. We've been through this 1000000000 times. You don't even understand the persistence of some of the people who came before you.
-Paul
BTW blonde women drunk on moonshine are the best kind....just not in-breds. I like them w/o 11 fingers please.
I think the problem is with the terms "hitting up" and "hitting down".
Some people take that it refers solely to the clubhead moving up or the clubhead moving down. Other people take it as "you- the golfer- is hitting down or up."
I think that's the whole problem.
Brian or someone else who can do it should jump in and explain the geometry of a circle and that the left shoulder is the LOW POINT of that circle, etc.
Briefly: the clubhead orbit traces a circle (no, not oval or anything else- a CIRCLE- the left arm, provided it is straight, is the radius of this circle) around the golfer's LEFT SHOULDER. Anything behind that left shoulder is hitting down- that's the way circles work. That's the jist- not even close to being explained well prolly.
You are right about the clubHEAD- the actual clubHEAD, as a whole is travelling upwards- ass-ending as you say
BUT the KEY thing is that the hands lead the clubhead through impact. Hank is certainly not adding loft at impact, right?
That's the only real important thing in this whole argument anyway.
It all has to do with low point, axis tilt thru impact, geometry of a circle etc.
I don't know how to explain it to you.
Look here, like I told you: http://www.manzellagolfforum.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1980&SearchTerms=taylor,made,MATT
And do a search...there is plenty of information to prove you wrong, believe it or not. We've been through this 1000000000 times. You don't even understand the persistence of some of the people who came before you.
-Paul
BTW blonde women drunk on moonshine are the best kind....just not in-breds. I like them w/o 11 fingers please.
All you can say is "hell no"??
If you want to say I'm wrong, give me some logical support for your arguement...please. truly there is none. If you guys understood what the MATT was saying (I added onto my post btw, read the last paragraph), you'd understand how phenomenally wrong you all are about it.
You're all trying to force the numbers to say what you want them to say. By doing that, you're contradicting the numbers themselves. This is pound your head into the wall illogical. The numbers do not and CAN NOT say what you guys are trying to make them say.
I did read the other thread btw, I'm just responding to what Brian wrote here instead. And I saw that the other guy was persistent. However, I'm probably a little bit brighter than he was. I will catch chasms in logic like the ones you've presented me with thusfar.
Now that i've blown ALL of your arguements out of the water, either say something that isn't self contradictory or admit that i'm right.
Also Brian - You mentioned Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein and said how Homer Kelley was as smart as those guys. Well, the problem is that anyone who knows much physics can tell you that BOTH were wrong. Both Newton's classical physics and Einstein's general/special theories of relativity are/were fundamentally flawed. Why is it so hard to beleive that Homer Kelley could have missed something?
and for everyone, I want you to try an experiment. take a normal stance with a club in your hand, stand facing a mirror. place the sole of the club about in line with your right foot or knee, with your hands about opposite your left thigh (ie forward lean). Now, moving nothing but your shoulders (and locking the other things in place) go slowly to the finish. See what happens between where the clubhead starts and outside of your left foot? The shaft is leaning forward AND the club (the grip end and the head) is moving up. Now please, explain that when you tell me forward shaft lean and downward angle are the same.
If you want to say I'm wrong, give me some logical support for your arguement...please. truly there is none. If you guys understood what the MATT was saying (I added onto my post btw, read the last paragraph), you'd understand how phenomenally wrong you all are about it.
You're all trying to force the numbers to say what you want them to say. By doing that, you're contradicting the numbers themselves. This is pound your head into the wall illogical. The numbers do not and CAN NOT say what you guys are trying to make them say.
I did read the other thread btw, I'm just responding to what Brian wrote here instead. And I saw that the other guy was persistent. However, I'm probably a little bit brighter than he was. I will catch chasms in logic like the ones you've presented me with thusfar.
Now that i've blown ALL of your arguements out of the water, either say something that isn't self contradictory or admit that i'm right.
Also Brian - You mentioned Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein and said how Homer Kelley was as smart as those guys. Well, the problem is that anyone who knows much physics can tell you that BOTH were wrong. Both Newton's classical physics and Einstein's general/special theories of relativity are/were fundamentally flawed. Why is it so hard to beleive that Homer Kelley could have missed something?
and for everyone, I want you to try an experiment. take a normal stance with a club in your hand, stand facing a mirror. place the sole of the club about in line with your right foot or knee, with your hands about opposite your left thigh (ie forward lean). Now, moving nothing but your shoulders (and locking the other things in place) go slowly to the finish. See what happens between where the clubhead starts and outside of your left foot? The shaft is leaning forward AND the club (the grip end and the head) is moving up. Now please, explain that when you tell me forward shaft lean and downward angle are the same.
birdie_man
New
I gave you all I feel like for now...sorry.
Maybe this is Horton's 3rd coming...
Like I said this argument's already been beat to death.
Like I said b4 too...it might be helpful to do a search on this as well and research some b4 you bring this argument to life again.
BTW you should calm down a bit...you're all high strung. You don't need to get all aggressive to debate....you're not fighting for your life or something here.
Have a nice day! (night? sleep maybe?)
-Paul
Maybe this is Horton's 3rd coming...
Like I said this argument's already been beat to death.
Like I said b4 too...it might be helpful to do a search on this as well and research some b4 you bring this argument to life again.
BTW you should calm down a bit...you're all high strung. You don't need to get all aggressive to debate....you're not fighting for your life or something here.
Have a nice day! (night? sleep maybe?)
-Paul
Ok this is dumb. You believe you understand the workings of great physicists when very few people in the world actually truely understand the logic and reasoning behind it. You haven't got past the low state of knowledge which is past on through TV documentarys on their work....- you profess a statement on them without the reasoning to back it up, just like you haven't got past the low state of knowledge that occurs on the golf channel.
See, that's where your wrong. I had 10 credit hours of Physics before I even went to college...not many can say that. What I said was absolutely factual. If you want me to get into WHY they're both wrong, this isn't exactly the correct forum for that. I will say this, they were both as right as they could possibly be given the limits of their technology. Also, Isaac Newtown not only invented physics, but INVENTED CALCULUS. He's the smartest man to ever live, and saying Homer Kelley was that smart because of TGM is really misguided and insulting.
However...I think I'm taking this debate a little too seriously. I'll be taking a break from golf and golf forums for at least a week. Have fun answering my questions. I'll be looking forward to a logical reply.
birdie_man
New
No need to leave for a week. We'll figure this out.
Just keep it friendly (everyone...).
....
With a ball placed at or slightly behind the left shoulder...the golfer's hands are hitting down...it only seems like up because of axis tilt away from the target at impact.
Think about the path of the hands for a second. Not the clubhead. Think of the left shoulder as the centre of a circle...and the left arm as the radius of that circle. You're a smart guy you'll see something in that.
Like I said before...that really is the important part...
Granted, yes the clubhead MAY be moving up...the clubHEAD...but who cares about the clubhead...you need to worry about the hands. You just have to make sure you have a flat left at impact (clubhead AT LEAST in-line with left arm- some would say slightly arched is better- i.e. Hogan, Sergio, CHIII, etc. etc. etc...the guys who have LAG).
The golfer's hands are hitting down...
That's the only important part really...telling people to hit up is gonna kill them because you lose your flat left wrist too easily...like I said before...you don't want to add loft really...
BTW some of those long drive guys are hitting down now too I think (forward lean at impact)...
It only seems like your HANDS (that's what the main focus should be here I think) are hitting up because of axis tilt away from the target at impact.
AGAIN, I think the confusion in this is that the hands hit down, yet the clubhead MAY actually move upwards, in relation to the ground, because of axis tilt. W/o axis tilt the club goes down at the ground...that's for damn sure- down all the way until you reach your left shoulder (the centre of the circle- remember)...THEN it starts moving upward...to complete the circle.
It really is all in how you take the terms "hitting down" and "hitting up".
I think when ppl here say HIT DOWN they mean with the hands...so as to not sacrifice impact alignments...can you at least agree that a flat left wrist at impact is important? It's way more important than most people know...and that's why this issue needs to be cleared up- so people don't try to hit up with their HANDS!!!!! HANDS!
-Paul
Just keep it friendly (everyone...).
....
With a ball placed at or slightly behind the left shoulder...the golfer's hands are hitting down...it only seems like up because of axis tilt away from the target at impact.
Think about the path of the hands for a second. Not the clubhead. Think of the left shoulder as the centre of a circle...and the left arm as the radius of that circle. You're a smart guy you'll see something in that.
Like I said before...that really is the important part...
Granted, yes the clubhead MAY be moving up...the clubHEAD...but who cares about the clubhead...you need to worry about the hands. You just have to make sure you have a flat left at impact (clubhead AT LEAST in-line with left arm- some would say slightly arched is better- i.e. Hogan, Sergio, CHIII, etc. etc. etc...the guys who have LAG).
The golfer's hands are hitting down...
That's the only important part really...telling people to hit up is gonna kill them because you lose your flat left wrist too easily...like I said before...you don't want to add loft really...
BTW some of those long drive guys are hitting down now too I think (forward lean at impact)...
It only seems like your HANDS (that's what the main focus should be here I think) are hitting up because of axis tilt away from the target at impact.
AGAIN, I think the confusion in this is that the hands hit down, yet the clubhead MAY actually move upwards, in relation to the ground, because of axis tilt. W/o axis tilt the club goes down at the ground...that's for damn sure- down all the way until you reach your left shoulder (the centre of the circle- remember)...THEN it starts moving upward...to complete the circle.
It really is all in how you take the terms "hitting down" and "hitting up".
I think when ppl here say HIT DOWN they mean with the hands...so as to not sacrifice impact alignments...can you at least agree that a flat left wrist at impact is important? It's way more important than most people know...and that's why this issue needs to be cleared up- so people don't try to hit up with their HANDS!!!!! HANDS!
-Paul
Jim Kobylinski
Super Moderator
Stumper...
The clubhead is moving up, but all your centrifugal force (swinging) or muscular thrust (hitting) is moving down plane. You cannot have a delofted clubhead unless you are striking the club with some sort of descending strike.
HOWEVER
The clubSHAFT is going to "kick" into impact and this can distort the readings of launch monitors and show the "ascending" path. This is a fact.
Please see this video of Ernie El's hitting driver from www.lynnblakegolf.com and you'll clearly see a clubhead that is still going "down" to its lowest point of the circle before it begins to move back up. Here is the link:
http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/Video/ErnieEls.wmv
The clubhead is moving up, but all your centrifugal force (swinging) or muscular thrust (hitting) is moving down plane. You cannot have a delofted clubhead unless you are striking the club with some sort of descending strike.
HOWEVER
The clubSHAFT is going to "kick" into impact and this can distort the readings of launch monitors and show the "ascending" path. This is a fact.
Please see this video of Ernie El's hitting driver from www.lynnblakegolf.com and you'll clearly see a clubhead that is still going "down" to its lowest point of the circle before it begins to move back up. Here is the link:
http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/Video/ErnieEls.wmv
birdie_man
New
Good stuff jimbo.
Here's another:
http://www.golfonline.com/golfonline/slideshow/0,17572,1030781-7,00.html
You can't tell me in good conscience that CHIII is hitting up there...
I know he is exceptional with doing that but hey, there's another example for you anyway.
Here's another:
http://www.golfonline.com/golfonline/slideshow/0,17572,1030781-7,00.html
You can't tell me in good conscience that CHIII is hitting up there...
I know he is exceptional with doing that but hey, there's another example for you anyway.
- Status