Jared Willerson
Super Moderator
It's arguments like these and my trying to be a "model" that have impeded my progress.
I wish I could undo trying to swing like anyone but me.
I wish I could undo trying to swing like anyone but me.
Fowler Stuff (now with p5 Manzella Answers)
- Thread starter Brian Manzella
- Start date
- Status
Dariusz J.
New member
No doubt. But here we discuss sciences (biomechanics and biokinetics are sciences as well) and we shouldn't end the discussion with "whatever works is good", IMO -- especially that we're talking about a Tour pro ! There are better and worse solutions to emulate especially for weekend hackers.
Do you think weekend hackers with not so good ability to deal with timing will score better with faster or slower closure rate ? with better or worse pivots ? more or less armsy swings ? better or worse balance in both vertical planes ? do we think distance-wise only or not ? everyone should think about and answer honestly.
Cheers
magicmarker
New
I pay attention to the science to better understand my own swing, not to make hackers better hackers. To answer your questions in spite of this I would say...
faster or slower closure rate.....depends on the individual hacker and what aspects of their swing are holding them back the most.
better or worse pivots.....better beats worse so I'll say better, however I think RF has an awesome pivot, I also think that the most effective shot producing pivot would be the definition of a better pivot, to each his own.
more or less armsy swings.... depends on the individual, I've seen both styles produce the full spectrum of results.
better or worse balance....better, of course, just like RF. Stand still and crack that whip!
distance-wise only or not....if you have precision throughout the bag, the only distance you need is 'enough'
Michael Finney
New
Darius and others,
I would recommend a moratorium on using "rate of closure" in posts when the data used is Casio video........the jury is WAAAAAAY out on the actual face rotations with regard to grip types, shaft torsional stiffness, release types, and off center hits......please, let some real research be done before you (or others) come up with patterns and methodologies built around observing video.....
Video has gotten everyone into the current mess, video is not going to get us out of it...
I would recommend a moratorium on using "rate of closure" in posts when the data used is Casio video........the jury is WAAAAAAY out on the actual face rotations with regard to grip types, shaft torsional stiffness, release types, and off center hits......please, let some real research be done before you (or others) come up with patterns and methodologies built around observing video.....
Video has gotten everyone into the current mess, video is not going to get us out of it...
Dariusz J.
New member
Hilarious...the truth is, ideas that can make hackers better hackers can help also you or even Tiger Woods.
Why ? There certainly exists rate of clubface closure and, totally, objectively, taking the physics and even math into account, the slower it is (or better said, the smaller in a given period of time) it is easier to control this phenomenon. It is so well known objective truth in the whole universe that I think we shouldn't even try to debate it. Instead, we should focus on how to achieve this goal, instead sticking still in middleages, IMO.
Cheers
magicmarker
New
I said I like watching him swing the club while he plays golf, not golf swing. I don't really know what you think is being emulated, at all.
Yes, the ideas presented around here can be of benefit to many, many golfers of all levels. I must've missed the part that was supposed to be hilarious.
Dariusz J.
New member
We discussed already this. You should think instead buying blindly this ideology that RoC is not important, Nate.
Again, it is not about the RoC in the very impact that is the same; it is about how tough it might be to deliver the clubface adequately square/closed/open to the ball (depending on intentions) ! If the RoC is smaller (the clubface stays square to the arc longer pre- and post-impact) it is objectively easier for anyone to deliver the clubface as we want because we can use more reliable elements such as e.g. stance or grip to match the clubface with intentions than the most distal elements in the chain.
OK, I have enough. Believe what you want. I sometimes feel as talking to deaf people.
Cheers
natep
New
I'm not convinced at all. I spent a ton of time on getting my "RoC" down and keeping the club more square to the arc for longer post impact. I missed just as many fairways and greens as when i would just let the right arm sling straight with a total disregard for closure. Thats really the only facts I'm worried about, not whatever you think "seems as if" by looking at pictures. The research is being done, and the results will be published in time. We shall see how these different techniques perform at the moment of impact.
Dariusz J.
New member
Most probably you tried wrong methods to achieve a better RoC then.
BTW, what researches ? What is the subject of researches ? Who is doing it ? What criteria are being taken into account ?
I know one serious research made by Trackman specialists that said the most consistent was Furyk by far. Not coincidentally, his RoC is the smallest of all pros. What say you ? Trackman people is your favourite source, isn't it ?
Cheers
puttmaster
New
Darius - with all due respect, sometimes it's not just the message but how that message is delivered. Case in point: when one calls an immense golf talent like Rickie Fowler "a pivot stalling armsy goat humper," then, yes, the audience is likely to turn a deaf ear to that person.
drewyallop
New
We shouldn't forget that the important metric is ROC during impact interval. As Kevin suggests video can tell us nothing about what happens during this extremely brief interval. Wait for the science.
(My guess is that nothing actionable occurs during the interval. And of more importance is the clubface orientation to the path at the beginning of the interval)
(My guess is that nothing actionable occurs during the interval. And of more importance is the clubface orientation to the path at the beginning of the interval)
Last edited:
dschultz6072
New
Rate of closure...is the move we are making through the ball not an attempt to SQUARE the face? The face of the club moves more like a putter through impact if the instrument is being used correctly. It seems to me one must learn to simply control the path of the clubhead, not so much the face (yea, really control the face as it swings over 100 mph, right?), assuming the clubhead is swinging through the ball freely and fluidly and with speed. These are just my feelings based on my own experimentation. I'm blind.
Dariusz J.
New member
But he is a pivot stalling armsy goat humper, for God's sake ! What should I say, he isn't if he is ?
Again, read my response to Nate. Someone with a strong crossover release will never deliver the clubace open and contact and make it being closed at separation because it is physically impossible to act this way. I believe the clubface at impact (between contact and separation) will look identically no matter what release type is being used in case of a good shot. I can predict the science and agree 100% to you all here.
The point is to associate problems with crossover release's rate of closure to the fact that it is more prone to deliver the clubface to the ball being too open or too closed because the clubface does not stay square to the arc through the whole impact zone and errors are much more probable than in case of push release type and even to slap-hinge release type. This is the whole point ! I do not care what happens in the milisecond of impact, I care how to deliver the clubface the way I want !
Cheers
dschultz6072
New
What strikes me as funny is the amount of legendary tour pros you would ask if anyone should swing like them. They would all reply "What suits me might not suit you". If Hogan video were all one needed to hit it like Hogan, it would be fine enough to just watch the video all day all night, copy his moves and be out on tour. It is not. It never will be. Nor will the person trying to copy Bubba Watson's moves trying to move it like Bubba ever really be able to hit it like Bubba. We all have our own fingerprint and the clubhead is the boss. There's only so much our bodies are individually capable of, and there's a reason the guys on tour are on TV and we are not. One part is hitting ten thousand golf balls a month, the other part is natural gifts from God.
JThompson
New
Dariusz J.
I appreciate your contribution to this thread and I value your inputs into biomechanics. But there are few things you have stated above that I would like to discuss further.
Can we agree that this type of release is very powerful and produces lots of speed?
If so, the only reason you don't think this swing is optimal is because it has a higher rate of closure compared to other types of releases? Thus, with a higher RoC it more difficult to make a consistent face orientation on impact?
Assuming Fowler's release has a higher rate of clubhead closure at impact then say Sergio's swing (which I still think is up for debate) that doesn't mean it is harder to time. It appears to me that Fowler's pivot really lets him square the club head. As he nears impact his hips/shoulders slow and his arms/wrist snap toward the ball allowing his clubhead to continue to square in a very repeatable fashion. The key is not the Rate of Closure. It is more the Que for Closure. Rickie's pivot tells his arms and wrists "okay time to snap into square". IMHO this is a very powerful and repeatable swing type.
Here is another release that is qued by the body slowing and arms wrist continuing. These guys are extremely well timed. Is this a stalled pivot?
If you do research you will find just as much variety in pitching mechanics as you will the golf swing. But usually the pitchers that continue turning their shoulders through release are starting pitchers that need to maintain a high level for 7+ innings and pitchers that slow/stop their shoulders are power/relief pitchers who can afford to give it everything they have for a couple innings. But accuracy IS NOT determined by the shoulder turn. This pitcher happens to be an exception. One of the best pitching motions in the history of baseball. We as golfers could learn a lot about his kenetic snap.
Last edited:
James Marshall (Hogan1953)
New member
Does anybody know RF's clubpath numbers by the way?
Dariusz J.
New member
No problem, but I am a bit tired with this "whole all against one" type of discussion.
Yes.
Yes.
Well, as I said in my post directed to Brian, it would be like this if Fowler finds an automatism of his sequence of events. It is much more easier to find it without pivot stall and goat humping. What we know is that he did not find it yet and his ballstriking stats are not excellent. What he does is good to power his motion, but not for accuracy. If Brian, his scientists or such Fowlers, Ogilvys, Mickelsons, Gays, etc. find the way how to automate pivot stall with a natural consequence of arms throw and crossover release -- OK. But it is wishful thinking. Much more promising is Hogan's or Furyk's way because it was already achieved. Not 100% automatism but partial without problem. And this we should research to make golf easier for masses. At least it is my goal.
Good night, Gents.
- Status