EdZ - where is it?

[Vaako]

quote:Originally posted by EdZ

Vaako - you are not following me - lowpoint isn't at the base of the neck (verticle to the ground) it is a line perpendicular to the shoulder line at both arms straight FROM the base of the neck - so axis tilt is a big factor - as seen in this excellent impact position that Brian posted. At impact the right arm is still bent, as is the right wrist - therefore FORCE can still continue downplane, until both arms straight as the right arm straightens, and the left shoulder continues to move UP - as the 'triangle' of both arms straight, and the shoulder line, becomes quite clear.

THAT is the magic triangle, and its tip, PP#1.

...

I'm a bit disappointed w/ you EdZ.

This magic triangle line would allways point way forward of left shoulder in anything resembling a normal golf swing. And if I lean backwards increasing axis tilt - what happens? My left shoulder will move backwards (and so the low point), but low point per your definition will stay the same or go forward.

So is this a re-iteration of some obscure Single Axis/Natural Golf principle I'm not aware or a quick foggy hack job? It's not easy to come up a geometric equivalent of left shoulder without referencing - yep, you guessed it - the left shoulder.

Funny thing here is that Single Axis golfers normally wish to place low point under the upper spine - yet you push it further forward then TGM'er do. [?]

In the end maybe I'm not just a following type. <shrug>


Vaako

 

[EdZ]

Go ahead and be disapointed Vaako, not my problem, and not a way to engage me in any civil discussion.

 

[Vaako]

Fair enough - I guess.

I thought you were coming from Single Axis background, this is where these center of upper spine ideas usually came. And your definition of low point sound more SA than TGM.

Discussion's over? Cool, no worries mate.


Vaako

 

[TGManMachine]

EdZ, since vaako has flicked you off, could you please clarify several points for me? Your analysis seems to be rather close to mine, but you have framed it in TGM terminology.

Kelley states that the rotation center can be the head which is not mandatory, but otherwise the left shoulder joint is considered to be the rotative center for the left arm. He recognizes both rotative centers approaching impact but apparently depends on the left shoulder joint for the descending path into impact.

This seems valid for irons where the ball is placed farther back in the stance, or the feet are brought together while leaving the ball at the same position. Regardless of the positioning of the ball for iron shots, the geometry will create a descending club head path.

However to extend this geometry to the driver swing where the ball is teed up and placed forward in a wide stance seems to be questionable. I think this faulty analysis is based on the premise that the rotative center approaching impact is still the left shoulder. Given the large back lateral spinal tilt for the drive swing, and the obvious connection of the left arm to the left pec, the dominant rotative axis must be found around the spinal axis at the shoulder level.

Launch monitor data confirms that optimal launch conditions are achieved with an ascending driver head which provides the best ball spin rates. Iron impact depends on more ball backspin for control and a descending blow is optimal. Even so, the fairways and long irons may depend on a level angle of attack for distance.

Between what is observable in video pics and launch monitor results, why is it that some on this forum prefer to believe that the driver path must be descending into the ball? I have presented my analysis in what I believe is a compelling manner, yet what I offer seems to be rejected and/or ignored. Your analysis seems to coincide with my analysis, so I ask you what do you think of my analysis? Thanks.

 

[Brian Manzella]

We believe it becuase you HIT THE BALL BETTER THAT WAY!!

25,000 golf lessons given....how many have you given?

 

[TGManMachine]

quote:Originally posted by brianman

We believe it becuase you HIT THE BALL BETTER THAT WAY!!

25,000 golf lessons given....how many have you given?

I have no doubt that your teaching methods result in satisfied and successful students. However, what we are discussing here is how do you determine that hitting down on the ball with the driver will produce better results than hitting up. Launch monitor data suggests that hitting up results in optimal launch conditions.

How do you, Brian, determine that hitting down with the driver provides the best results? How do you measure to quantify your results?

 

[Brian Manzella]

NO NO NO NO....

"Launch Monitor" data....does NOT.

What the "data" shows is how to hit the ball farther...in SOME conditions.

My data is MUCH MUCH MUCH much more valid.

 

[BigBadDonkey]

The Pro's hit down . Shown on TV in slow mo.

 

[TGManMachine]

quote:Originally posted by brianman

NO NO NO NO....

"Launch Monitor" data....does NOT.

What the "data" shows is how to hit the ball farther...in SOME conditions.

My data is MUCH MUCH MUCH much more valid.

How do you measure your data?

 

[Brian Manzella]

Lower Scores of my students.

Like this student of mine.

He was coming from below the plane and HITTING UP ON HIS DRIVER.

Not after I fixed him.

 

[EdZ]

Two separate discussions here, and I've already stated my view on the 'up' vs 'down' - down is better.

As far as 'center' goes.....

Single Axis - the folks trying to get the BODY on a single axis might think the physics advantages are more beneficial than the anatomy disadvanges, but I'd say anatomy wins that one, you can't really play from those positions to full efficiency.

That said there IS a single 'axis' if you will, a single PLANE that FORCE travels on in a good swing. What is that force most related to? The sweetspot. What does that force travel around? It's 'center'. Spin a wheel - there is one 'center', the balance point, the center of mass.

People get caught up in thinking that the body, or certain body parts, must be 'mapped' to that FORCE, when in reality the force is simply traveling around in a circle in 3 dimensional space around 'center'. A series of vectors that the body creates and sends TO the sweetspot.

Take a club and hold it out in front of you at chest/shoulder high. Forget thinking about 'where' impact is - just swing back and through on this plane and reach a 'both arms straight' position - where the club is farthest from you. "allow" rotation, and you've got a swingers move.

Now that 'force', the sweetspot, reaches its maximum distance away from you at both arms straight, by definition.

In a swing, you are in effect making this same move - however YOU ARE POSITIONING THE CIRCLE TO HAVE IMPACT BEFORE BOTH ARMS STRAIGHT

For a number of very good reasons, you want impact to happen before then - lag has many advantages. However REGARDLESS of where you position that circle relative to the ground, you must continue to send force to that both arms straight position for maximum benefit.

In golf posture, you are making this same move, but you have positioned the 'circle' such that both arms straight will ALWAYS occur after impact - well after.

You have also positioned that circle to ensure that you will ALWAYS impact the ball WELL before you have reached the 'maximum' circle, that of both arms straight.

The left arm/club LOOKS like it is the key, because in a good swing IMPACT and separation will show that the straight line relationship is in place. This is a good thing, yes, but it is not the whole story. The right arm is still bent, the right wrist is still bent and there is still more 'room' to reach the full extension of both arms straight.



Send FORCE to both arms straight, and position the 'circle' to best advantage.

The 'center' of that force is the mid point between the shoulders. The 'middle of the wheel'.

 

[TGManMachine]

EdZ

What some think is that the swing radius must be located in body parts and then they create a swing center to accomodate that radius. Kelley prefered to use the left shoulder joint as the swing center and the left arm and club as the solid swing radius.
He also mentioned that the head could be considered a swing center, but that would not fit his Power Accumulator concept.

In reality, the swing center is as you say in the upper torso between the shoulders, and this is the only swing center when the left arm has bottomed out and is rotating in unison with the torso. From this swing center, the swing radius extends between the arm, over or through the top of the wrists, above the shaft and to the sweet spot or center of percussion of the clubhead. In effect the swing radius is virtually all in the air approaching impact.

Another misconception is that if the swing center is not in body parts, how can you apply any leverage to the swing radius? Well you don't because when you are rotating freely you are generating centripetal force along that swing radius. Of course the forces in the arms and hands are vectored to maintain the overall centripetal force and this is what you feel and call centrifugal force.

Kelley somewhat understood the physics of the golf swing but those that claim to apply TGM are seemingly devoid of understanding the principles of physics and depend solely on their feel and misconceptions. Oh well.

 

[mandrin]

EdZ, you might find the linked information interesting, where I have shown a 3-segment 2D-swing sequence. The base of the neck is taken as the stable center for the swing. The ball position is indicated by the intersection of the blue and horizontal lines.

For this particular swing sequence, with hands nicely ahead of the ball at impact, the clubhead descends, whilst the hands and lead shoulder are rising during impact. Once the hands lead substantially it is not easy to have the clubhead rising through impact. The forward flexing of the shaft during impact is not taking into account but further complicates matters.

mandrin

 

[Brian Manzella]

!

 

[TGManMachine]

mandrin

Interesting idealized diagramming, but how does this relate to a real-life model of the golf swing? Questions I would have of you are:

1 - If the hands lead deep into the bottom of the swing, would you by necessity require to have a heavily arched left wrist to maintain this swing alignment? Also to create this leading left arm position would require a resistive counter-torque in the left wrist, or even a forced independent rotation of the left arm around the shoulder joint causing a disconnection with the left pec. This orientation would also impede the efficient exchanges within the kinetic chain in the latter part of the golf swing. Furthermore, an arched left wrist would be contrary to the TGM Imperative of a "Flat" left wrist. How could you reconcile this seeming contradiction with the concept of a descending club head as shown in your modelling?

2 - Where would the foot stance be in relation to the upper swing center and the left shoulder? Also where would the ball be teed in relation to the lead foot?

3 - How would you diagram the laterally back tilting of the spinal axis through bottom of the swing? The position of the rotating left shoulder is on an upward and possibly backward (past horizontal) rotating path when the club head is at the bottom of the swing.

4 - The omission of the flexing of the shaft through impact and the orientation of the twisting-drooping-kicking club head could substantially affect impact dynamics on a sub-atomic level
To this I would add that launch monitor measurements pre and post impact would help resolve some of the mystery.

Do you think that TGM needs some upgrading to bring it into line with current scientific knowledge of the golf swing? Kelley did say TGM was a scientific treatise, but it's adherents seem to have cast it into stone. Very dangerous if you ask me!

 

[Brian Manzella]

I will 'play' a bit more ONLY in an attempt at making my REAL membership (the ones here to learn) learn a lttle more.

I have proven the following things (very important for those interested in learning) that have not even been discussed.

1. The ONLY way for the club to move down if the left arm has swung back from address any and the wrists are 'frozen' is to RAISE the left shoulder.

2. If the left wrist is flat the bottom of the swing is the left shoulder.

additionally, if there IS rotation in a golf swing, and there is, it HAS to come from the pivot and the 'center' of that HAS TO BE somewhere between the shoulders.

This 'rotational center' has NOTHING to do with LOW POINT and NOTHING TO DO with the left shoulder needing to go UP to make the club go down.

Also, the GOLF DIGEST 'clip' clearly showed a forward leaning shaft and a rizing clubhead due to the shaft bending forward at impact.

All of this is absolute fact, friends in golf, and central to any golfer or golf teacher's information base.

I love new stuff, I have been to 22 PGA Shows in a row and EVERY PGA Teaching Summit.

I am very sure I am the ONLY PERSON ALIVE that in the last 20 years--AFTER already teaching full-time---I did the following:

PGA Member who won a section teacher of the year award
Taught multiple golfers who later became PGA Tour players and one who won a major
Taught ON the PGA Tour over a 13 year period
Became a GSED,
Became a PING/HG/Swing-Sync clubfitter
Went to all the summits and all of those shows...

There are some who might be close to doing all (Gring, Noel)

but only I have done all of the above.

the reason I bring this up is because I love to learn!!!!

But sadly, I am not learning anything from a very closed minded debate.

Hopefully, my members, I will live up to your expectations in the future.

Trolls or no Trolls.

 

[Burner]

Seems to me that there are a whole lot of semantics being used by various contributors to this thread in order to score a point or for simple obfuscation purposes.

The arguments seem to centre around the flail, leading arm and clubshaft or the swing centre, being the sternum, base of the throat or whatever floats your descriptive boat.

The low point of the swing will always be the post in-line condition of the flail, and the swing centre will always be the sternum etc. These are two entirely different entities and must not be confused.

Curious thing is that in a correctly executed golf swing the anchor point of the flail, leading shoulder, begins its forward travel from a point where the swing centre is located at address - under the chin, or above the sternum, or at the base of the throat, what have you. See Brian's signature swing above.

 

[birdie_man]

quote:Originally posted by brianman

I will 'play' a bit more ONLY in an attempt at making my REAL membership (the ones here to learn) learn a lttle more.

I have proven the following things (very important for those interested in learning) that have not even been discussed.

1. The ONLY way for the club to move down if the left arm has swung back from address any and the wrists are 'frozen' is to RAISE the left shoulder.

2. If the left wrist is flat the bottom of the swing is the left shoulder.

additionally, if there IS rotation in a golf swing, and there is, it HAS to come from the pivot and the 'center' of that HAS TO BE somewhere between the shoulders.

This 'rotational center' has NOTHING to do with LOW POINT and NOTHING TO DO with the left shoulder needing to go UP to make the club go down.

Also, the GOLF DIGEST 'clip' clearly showed a forward leaning shaft and a rizing clubhead due to the shaft bending forward at impact.

All of this is absolute fact, friends in golf, and central to any golfer or golf teacher's information base.

I love new stuff, I have been to 22 PGA Shows in a row and EVERY PGA Teaching Summit.

I am very sure I am the ONLY PERSON ALIVE that in the last 20 years--AFTER already teaching full-time---I did the following:

PGA Member who won a section teacher of the year award
Taught multiple golfers who later became PGA Tour players and one who won a major
Taught ON the PGA Tour over a 13 year period
Became a GSED,
Became a PING/HG/Swing-Sync clubfitter
Went to all the summits and all of those shows...

There are some who might be close to doing all (Gring, Noel)

but only I have done all of the above.

the reason I bring this up is because I love to learn!!!!

But sadly, I am not learning anything from a very closed minded debate.

Hopefully, my members, I will live up to your expectations in the future.

Trolls or no Trolls.

Good post Brian. Thank you man...I learned a lot.

Makes sense to me...the separation of the rotational centre and the left shoulder as low point.

I personally trust you as a source of good information...you have studied and also have tons of real-world experience verifying what you have studied. It's easy to see you have a passion to learn and improve that is greater than most people. I can respect that and respect what you are doing in this forum.

I don't think you should kill yourself anymore for people who don't want to trust you and learn from you...some people on this forum are just way too anal and paranoid, in my opinion. I think you have explained enough and shown enough to prove your point. They'll likely want a mathematical equation from you next...and when that's not good enough, a validation from God himself. Crieky...

Thanks again Brian.

 

[EdZ]

Not to nit pick much Brian, just wanted to note that your #1 and #2 items assume a stable pivot center....

 

[TGManMachine]

quote:Originally posted by EdZ

Not to nit pick much Brian, just wanted to note that your #1 and #2 items assume a stable pivot center....

Is that "stable pivot center" the Stationary Head to stabilize the Stoke motion and return the Clubhead through the ball on a Centered Arc? If so then the Geometry of the Physics would require that the rotating swing radius must be drawn from the head to the ball and that would be the correct circle geometry.

Furthermore in 2-D-0 it is stated:

"The force of the Impact will hold the ball against the face of the orbiting Clubhead and so carry it along the same circular path. This places the ball under the laws of Centrifugal Force. Which requires that the ball leave its circular path at right angles to the radius of that path at the point at which it leaves that path."

To me this suggests that if the rotative center is the Head, and the rotative radius must is drawn from that center to the ball. Thus, circle geometry would result in an impact after low point and a rising swing arc through the ball. The right angle drawn from this ascending radius path would then result in an ascending ball path from impact.

Conversely if the circle radius is descending, then the right angle from the swing radius would result in a descending ball path. This would geometrically drive the ball into the ground if it were not for the driver face loft that imparts excessive backspin to get the ball up into the air.

If you strictly follow Kelley's explanation, then he depends on excessive backspin to ensure the ball gets up into the air with the descending driver path. Launch monitor measurements has determined that this is not optimal for maximum distance. That's a fact folks, and unless your club head speeds are well below 100mph, I would suggest that you not attempt to hit down with your driver.