Free-wheeling through impact

[wallywonga]

A freewheeling club head through impact.

It is my understanding from reading TGM thus far that the action of a bent right wrist, bent right elbow and the right side of the body will support the shaft through impact and reduce the effects of club head slowdown from impacting the ball.

However consider this study by Cochran and Stubbs published in SSP and conducted in line with agreed testing standards.

Impact with the ball pushes the club head back on the shaft by only a few tenths of an inch. To bend the shaft by this amount requires a force of only a few pounds (compared to the 2000lb peak force applied in a drive with 100mph club head speed); and conversely in this bent back condition the shaft applies only a few pounds force to the club head. So this is all that the shaft and the hands with it can apply to the club head during impact – quite negligible compared with the force approaching one ton which the club head applies to the ball and the ball to the club head. It means that virtually all the resistance to impact, during actual contact, is borne by the inertia of the club head (Inertia is defined as the property possessed by an object which it opposes an agency’s attempt to put it in motion or if in motion alter the direction or magnitude of its velocity)

THAT IS TO SAY, AT THAT MOMENT IT MIGHT JUST AS WELL NOT BE CONNECTED TO THE PLAYER.

The team felt this such a crucial point they tested it. A two wood was built with a hinge attaching the shaft to the head. The hinge and head were free to move independent of the shaft. The shots hit with the hinged club averaged 215 yards, this was only 5 yards different to the standard 2 wood. The team felt that much of this could be explained by the added weight of the hinge and the loss of confidence by the players swinging the club.

In conclusion it was felt that the inability of the player to exert any positive influence on the ball during impact was as follows: the only dynamic factor that matters in producing distance is club head speed. A given club head making a square contact with the ball at 100 mph will send it the same distance whether it is accelerating, slowing down, or moving at constant speed. Once the club head is a few inches from the ball and on its own pre-determined path guided by momentum it may as well be a separate projectile.

The player has in effect put the club in orbit around its hub and by the time it meets the ball it is on its own.

Page 145/6, Search for the Perfect Swing – Cochran and Stubbs et al


Any thoughts?

Wally

Page 145/6, Search for the Perfect Swing – Cochran and Stubbs et al

 

[horton]

The SPS findings were also confirmed by a controlled scientific study presented at the 1994 World Scientific Congress of Golf, namely:

Centrifugal Force and the Planar Golf Swing - B. Lowe and I.H. Fairweather - Melbourne Australia.

An interesting finding in this scientific study is "... that better players primarily utilise centrifugal forces, rather than supination of he left wrist to square the clubhead, near Impact." !!!!!!!!!!!!

This would seemingly contradict Homers assertions that a flat left wrist is necessary to sustain the LOC, because hand or wrist manipulation is irrelevant for better golfers. Somehow I don't think that Homer was a "better golfer" when he produced TGM for himself.

In another post addressed to brianman, I suggested that better golfers could not sustain the LOC because the time of the Impact event was too short according to recent USGA study.

It seems as if recent legitimate science has obsoleted Homer's old scientific assumptions. That's what happens when you publish a golf book claiming a scientific underpinning to your theories. New science comes along and destroys old science assumptions. Pity ...

 

[Brian Manzella]

Hey Horton!

Did you know that ole Frank Thomas has been blown up in many circle for false-science.

Of course you wouldn't.

 

[horton]

quote:Originally posted by brianman

Hey Horton!

Did you know that ole Frank Thomas has been blown up in many circle for false-science.

Of course you wouldn't.

Don't slander .... be specific ..... provide your proof please ......

 

[rundmc]

quote:Originally posted by horton

The SPS findings were also confirmed by a controlled scientific study presented at the 1994 World Scientific Congress of Golf, namely:

Centrifugal Force and the Planar Golf Swing - B. Lowe and I.H. Fairweather - Melbourne Australia.

An interesting finding in this scientific study is "... that better players primarily utilise centrifugal forces, rather than supination of he left wrist to square the clubhead, near Impact." !!!!!!!!!!!!

This would seemingly contradict Homers assertions that a flat left wrist is necessary to sustain the LOC, because hand or wrist manipulation is irrelevant for better golfers. Somehow I don't think that Homer was a "better golfer" when he produced TGM for himself.

In another post addressed to brianman, I suggested that better golfers could not sustain the LOC because the time of the Impact event was too short according to recent USGA study.

It seems as if recent legitimate science has obsoleted Homer's old scientific assumptions. That's what happens when you publish a golf book claiming a scientific underpinning to your theories. New science comes along and destroys old science assumptions. Pity ...

So you are saying "good players" use "centrifugal force." OK. How do good players DEVELOP AND PRECISELY APPLY centrifugal force? Through what techniques? What function do the hands/wrists have? Are they used at all? If so, precisely in what manner?

In the other thread you were discussing centripetal force? Could you expand on the differences?

I think that you would agree that it is possible to swing the club independently from the wrists/hands. This is not what Mr. Kelley advocated. Just wanted to make that clear.

 

[MizunoJoe]

wallyw,

My thoughts on the C&S experiment are that, since the hinged club gave 210 yds vs 215 yds for the unhinged shaft, the stressed shaft resisted the ball weight while the hinged shaft didn't. There's another angle though. Namely that the hinge gives a 3 lever system which has a theoretical advantage as a velocity multiplier. Were the impact head speeds measured? It's possible that the hinged shaft gave a greater head speed, which would be even further proof that the stressed shaft is desirable.

Note that the test team "felt" that the added weight of the hinge and the player's lack of confidence accounted for the difference. How "scientific" is that?

 

[horton]

quote:Originally posted by rundmc


So you are saying "good players" use "centrifugal force." OK. How do good players DEVELOP AND PRECISELY APPLY centrifugal force? Through what techniques? What function do the hands/wrists have? Are they used at all? If so, precisely in what manner?

I would have to write a book to explain all your questions, but in short, centrifugal force is generated through the Kinetic Chain of segmental body rotations. Homer has provided his TGM techniques on how this is done .... great method, lousy science.

quote:In the other thread you were discussing centripetal force? Could you expand on the differences?

Same thing ... Non-inertial frame of reference = centrifugal force ... Inertial frame of reference = centripetal force.

Hope that helps ....

 

[horton]

quote:Originally posted by MizunoJoe

wallyw,

My thoughts on the C&S experiment are that, since the hinged club gave 210 yds vs 215 yds for the unhinged shaft, the stressed shaft resisted the ball weight while the hinged shaft didn't. There's another angle though. Namely that the hinge gives a 3 lever system which has a theoretical advantage as a velocity multiplier. Were the impact head speeds measured? It's possible that the hinged shaft gave a greater head speed, which would be even further proof that the stressed shaft is desirable.

Note that the test team "felt" that the added weight of the hinge and the player's lack of confidence accounted for the difference. How "scientific" is that?

Another recent scientific study identified a "kickback effect" occuring during the Impact event that could improve distance provided the timing of the flexing shaft tip were optimal. This effect does no preclude the "disconnection hinging" of the shaft tip, but perhaps a fully hinged shaft tip as in SPS eliminated the kickback effect resulting in lower disances.

Nevertheless, it is generally accepted that the golfer cannot manipulate the hinging, drooping, twisting and kicking clubhead through Impact.

 

[MizunoJoe]

What would help is to explain how you can NOW say that Homer's 'method' is "great", when he insists that lag pressure is maintained, not only PAST Impact, but even beyond. In fact, he says it is NEVER released. You maintain that the pressure disappears at impact in a good player's swing.

 

[horton]

quote:Originally posted by MizunoJoe

What would help is to explain how you can NOW say that Homer's 'method' is "great", when he insists that lag pressure is maintained, not only PAST Impact, but even beyond. In fact, he says it is NEVER released. You maintain that the pressure disappears at impact in a good player's swing.

Homer didn't know what he was experiencing so he can be forgiven for his ignorance. Nothing much revolves around the presence or absence of PP #3 over 0.4 ms through Impact. Homer was just urging golfers to keep the hands moving through Release and Impact so as not to flip them.

Homer's sin is that he asserted PP #3 sustained the LOC because science told him so. Homer's feel was not real as recent scientific research has determined.

TGM is mired in Homers "intuitive physics" .... even though his methodology has merit. Somebody has to sanitize Homer's screwy science out of TGM to make it understanable and believable.

 

[Brian Manzella]

If you keep talking about scientific studies, sir. Post 'em up.

 

[FL-John]

But if 'new' science, keeps refuting the 'old' science, it may be hard to believe any of the recent finding as truthful, especially since they will replaced...

FL-John

 

[wallywonga]

I beleive we both did Search for the perfect swing were also confirmed by a controlled scientific study presented at the 1994 World Scientific Congress of Golf, namely:

Centrifugal Force and the Planar Golf Swing - B. Lowe and I.H. Fairweather - Melbourne Australia.

An interesting finding in this scientific study is "... that better players primarily utilise centrifugal forces, rather than supination of he left wrist to square the clubhead, near Impact." !!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[MizunoJoe]

wallyw,

You mean that the 94 study confirmed the C&S result that the stressed shaft gave more distance than the unstressed shaft?

 

[wallywonga]

Sorry Joe you sneeked in between my reply to Brian, that post was not directed toward you.

With regard to your earlier question I cannot say wether or not the hinge would or would not have acted as a 3rd lever.

There is no mention of that in the book.

However as they made such a point about it in the book I would like to think if this had occurd it would have been noted.

I am no scientist just a golf pro who is dedicated to learning as many different views on the swing as possible. At present this area of study fascinates me.

I agree with the concept of Homers book and think his take on the proceedures and their application in the swing have a lot of merit.

There does appear to be some question behind the WHY (science) it works not the fact that it does work. I am sympathetic toward Hortans and Mandrins take on things as I like to question and never take anything on face value. The fact that there is such resistance to any notion that perhaps Homer may have been wrong on a couple of things amazes me.

The back of SPS says, Internationally renowned scientists in physics, ballistics, human biomechanics, ergonomics, and cybernatics conducted this ground breaking intensive six year study of the golf swing.

Homer, one very clever man (not an engineer etc etc we know that) Is it not possible that some of Homers science was wrong. Two people here seem to think so.

The study mentioned above would appear to contradict some of Homers assumptions also.

I really cant see that if Homer were challenged and eventually proven wrong on issues that he would not incorporate them into later publications.

As he states the swing is governed by the laws of force and motion and geometry, this as it would appear was his reasoning behind why the book was so correct. If there are flaws in his science should they not be corrected. This does not detract from the fact that the method of teaching TGM does appear to really help individuals. you can see elements of TGM diluted through just about every modern day instructional book. Leadbetter was undoutoudly influenced by the use of the right forearm in his teaching etc.

Anyway thats enough from me. Sorry to ramble on so much.

Wally.

 

[horton]

quote:Originally posted by brianman

If you keep talking about scientific studies, sir. Post 'em up.

But you keep deleting them in my posts .....

 

[fdb2]

quote:Originally posted by horton

Originally posted by brianman

If you keep talking about scientific studies, sir. Post 'em up.

But you keep deleting them in my posts .....


Hey Horton or Peter.

Here's a suggestion. In golf an astute student of the game can teach and also apply gained knowledge. Now both Manzella and Yoda have posted their swings on the web. Since you probably have the technology please educate these numbskulls. Please post your swing so all can see. I personally would like to see what an astute person can do, meaning can you walk your talk????? /

 

[TGMfan]

Horton,

Good work, it sounds like you're starting to get this Flat Left Wrist idea. The reason Mr. Kelley thought it was so important to keep it flat is that it prevents throwaway, that nasty habit of letting the clubhead pass the hands by bending it.

("Flat", BTW, is one of those precise terms that Mr. Kelley liked to use. There are a lot of degrees of "bent", and a lot of degrees of "arched". but only one degree of "flat" - which you can find for yourself at Impact Fix.)

Anyway, the Flat Left Wrist forces the clubhead and hands to go through the release interval at the same RPM - which hardly seems to fit the usual idea of "free-wheeling". In fact, poorer players should stay as far away from that image as possible, since it tends to support their habit of bending their left wrist.

 

[David Alford]

Brian, you shouldn't delete posts unless there is foul language being used.
Was that the case?

 

[David Alford]

Yoda has also said a firm grip thru impact may yield extra yardage. I don't think so. I believe the clubhead is "freewheeling". What is important are the angles and KE. Otherwise, no one would be able to hit a "Whippy" driver very far.