One of the greatest expressions by a leading scientist of how we as a group of golf professionals can improve our approach.
From[ Young-Hoo Kwon
"The (Newtonian) mechanical principles and laws are straight forward and are the basis of human movements (golf swings) regardless of the level of their play or instruction.
Problems, however, occur when we apply these principles/laws in understanding golf swing [bio]mechanics.
In most cases, it is because of the lack of understanding of the basic mechanical principles. During my not so long career in golf swing biomechanics, I've already seen plenty of nonsenses which could be prevented with a basic understanding of physics and mechanics.
Many problems also rise when one brings in bad science (erroneous data) to prove what he/she claims or uses science in wrong contexts.
While I admit that the science of golf mechanics/biomechanics itself presents some issues, one sticky aspect in my perspective is how the science and scientific facts are currently embraced by the golf community.
It should be relatively painless if one is not attached to a specific swing model or teaching method as it will only help the instructor self-examine and refine his/her current teaching practices.
I have seen many instructors who are genuinely interested in learning golf swing biomechanics regardless of their levels of success but, unfortunately, have also seen several who only want to hear what they want to hear. This is because golf practitioners often embrace/reject science and scientific facts selectively depending on their own agenda. If science presents facts that are against the swing model or teaching method that you are practicing and promoting, would you be open-minded enough to embrace them?
While the basic principles do not change, mechanical interpretations of golf swing often can change from today to tomorrow. This is mostly because of the amount and quality of data the interpretations were based on.
In scientific research we tend to ask one question at a time in a given study scope but the findings are often generalized beyond the scope of the study in the application process.
Recent years, we have seen a lot more info available for the instructors. This is due to the availability of hands-on equipment used in the field and data accumulated. We will soon be able to develop the eyes and ears to weed out bad science and benefit from the scientific facts."
— Young-Hoo Kwon
From[ Young-Hoo Kwon
"The (Newtonian) mechanical principles and laws are straight forward and are the basis of human movements (golf swings) regardless of the level of their play or instruction.
Problems, however, occur when we apply these principles/laws in understanding golf swing [bio]mechanics.
In most cases, it is because of the lack of understanding of the basic mechanical principles. During my not so long career in golf swing biomechanics, I've already seen plenty of nonsenses which could be prevented with a basic understanding of physics and mechanics.
Many problems also rise when one brings in bad science (erroneous data) to prove what he/she claims or uses science in wrong contexts.
While I admit that the science of golf mechanics/biomechanics itself presents some issues, one sticky aspect in my perspective is how the science and scientific facts are currently embraced by the golf community.
It should be relatively painless if one is not attached to a specific swing model or teaching method as it will only help the instructor self-examine and refine his/her current teaching practices.
I have seen many instructors who are genuinely interested in learning golf swing biomechanics regardless of their levels of success but, unfortunately, have also seen several who only want to hear what they want to hear. This is because golf practitioners often embrace/reject science and scientific facts selectively depending on their own agenda. If science presents facts that are against the swing model or teaching method that you are practicing and promoting, would you be open-minded enough to embrace them?
While the basic principles do not change, mechanical interpretations of golf swing often can change from today to tomorrow. This is mostly because of the amount and quality of data the interpretations were based on.
In scientific research we tend to ask one question at a time in a given study scope but the findings are often generalized beyond the scope of the study in the application process.
Recent years, we have seen a lot more info available for the instructors. This is due to the availability of hands-on equipment used in the field and data accumulated. We will soon be able to develop the eyes and ears to weed out bad science and benefit from the scientific facts."
— Young-Hoo Kwon