Gyroscopic Action

[birdie_man]

quote:Originally posted by mandrin
birdie_man,

Ask Yoda if Homer’s scientific ideas pertaining to golf are just smallish details.

If you do, please report back with the answer, some here might be surprised.

It's alright. I know what I think.

 

[Jared Willerson]

I don't think the advice is free, most everyone here has bought one video or several. I take offense to your reference as a bunch of cheap free-loaders. May be true of a few, but certainly not the majority.

Most of us here are just concerned with our golf games. You want to talk science and engineering in an exacting nature, which is quite complicated in a constantly evolving subject like the golf swing. People and patterns will always be changing.

Good luck in trying to prove anyone wrong in golf. I personally think something can be learned from everyone without ripping their work to shreds.

quote:Originally posted by mandrin

quote:Originally posted by brianman

If Mandrin changed his tone a bit, and realized that what Homer set out to do, he did, we could learn from each other a lot better.

Brian, I get that funny impression that strangely enough I am the only one showing serious interest in Homer's scientific ideas.

A frequent post here is like - ‘I could not care less about Homer’s scientific ideas, all I want is (free []) golf advice from Brian’.

Homer would probably turn around in his grave hearing all that diminishing talk about a life time of strenuous efforts.

 

[MizunoJoe]

quote:Originally posted by hiroshiro


I don't know why the hard core aficionados cling to the belief that what is written is unalterable gospel

I've honestly have never read the stuff about the gyroscope and don't really care about the science behind it. There's a ton of good stuff in the book, such as the 3 imperatives. I think Homer went too far with the 3rd imperative - no one keeps the sweetspot on plane throughout the entire swing, not even the most accomplished, BUT, all good players do have a planar motion from release to separation. Also, Homer speaks of a 4 barrel swing, which I don't believe exists, so the yellow book is not gospel to me.

 

[mandrin]

quote:Originally posted by jap4s

Mandrin is great. Truly an orginal thinker.

jap4s, thanks.

A peculiar paradox is that on one hand one science is used ad nauseam to make things appear look important.

Whereas golfers as they appear through many posters on this forum are enthusiastic adepts of science bashing.

 

[MizunoJoe]

quote:Originally posted by JohnThomas1

You're getting pretty serious digger.

Relax - he's just kidding. [8D]

 

[JohnThomas1]

PHEW LOL!! Long time no see Joe

 

[MizunoJoe]

quote:Originally posted by JohnThomas1

PHEW LOL!! Long time no see Joe

Oh yeah - holen1's forum. Good to see you finally found Brian's site!

 

[mandrin]

quote:Originally posted by glcoach

I don't think the advice is free, most everyone here has bought one video or several. I take offense to your reference as a bunch of cheap free-loaders. May be true of a few, but certainly not the majority.

Most of us here are just concerned with our golf games. You want to talk science and engineering in an exacting nature, which is quite complicated in a constantly evolving subject like the golf swing. People and patterns will always be changing.

Good luck in trying to prove anyone wrong in golf. I personally think something can be learned from everyone without ripping their work to shreds.

glcoach, your post is an excellent example of incoherent reasoning.

‘You want to talk science and engineering in an exacting nature, which is quite complicated in a constantly evolving subject like the golf swing. People and patterns will always be changing’

Above clearly and strongly expressed the idea of change. Fine, agree totally

Good luck in trying to prove anyone wrong in golf. I personally think something can be learned from everyone without ripping their work to shreds.

A sudden 180 deg change of direction. I am admonished to not touch Homer’s ideas. They seemingly are to remain cast in stone, for ever.



BTW - If you do not agree with my ideas, feel free to rip them apart. Progress is only through a critical attitude, not by a romantic wishy-washy attitude.

 

[palmreader]

Come on guys, I like Mandrin's posts. He is trying to understand the golf swing, and in doing so he find inconsistencies in Homer's work. Yellow book is not the bible (pardon me bible may have thing or two wrong), so is any other scientififc book written. The book contains the best decriptions one can find of the golf swing, and there is nothing wrong with pointing out mistakes. I wish Mandrin will explain how one can improve the golf swing the same time.

The threads started by Madrin are the longest in this Forum, and that goes to show that most people like to read what he writes.

 

[Erik_K]

Has this guy's posts done anything to help another's swing? I have no problem going over what HK did...but I don't find ANY of mandrin's post to be of some use.

 

[mcflog]

quote:Originally posted by Erik_K

Has this guy's posts done anything to help another's swing? I have no problem going over what HK did...but I don't find ANY of mandrin's post to be of some use.

If his post are of no use and everyone has so much contempt for him simply do not read and do not reply. The need for many here to dance this dance with him accomplishes nothing. You are entitled to feel that whether he is right or wrong it does nothing for your golf swing, thats how I feel. I didn't come here for a physics class. But the sparring back in forth and the threats of violence (in jest or not) are childish at best. If he starts a thread do not respond to it. If he threadjacks a thread inapppropiately delete the posts. If Brian wants to debate him debate him.
But if anyone feels he is distracting the learning that is possible here than they are no better than him by creating page after page of junk. Agree to disagree and go on. Quit wasting your time, I hate already that I wasted my time posting this

 

[mandrin]

quote:Originally posted by Erik_K

Has this guy's posts done anything to help another's swing? I have no problem going over what HK did...but I don't find ANY of mandrin's post to be of some use.

Erik_K, don’t go half way, be consistent to maintain some intellectual integrity.

Let’s resume your philosophy -

-1- mandrin’s ideas and concepts are scientific in nature.
-2- mandrin’s ideas therefore are of no value to me.

and applying the same reasoning, you therefore also equally agree that,

-3- Homer’s ideas and concepts are scientific in nature
-4- Homer’s ideas are therefore of no value to me, Erik_K.

Erik_K, you can’t have it both ways. If you want to discuss, than do so, but please spare me your incoherent spacious romantic self-contradictory babbling.

 

[mcflog]

quote:Originally posted by mandrin

quote:Originally posted by Erik_K

Has this guy's posts done anything to help another's swing? I have no problem going over what HK did...but I don't find ANY of mandrin's post to be of some use.

Erik_K, don’t go half way, be consistent to maintain some intellectual integrity.

Let’s resume your philosophy -

-1- mandrin’s ideas and concepts are scientific in nature.
-2- mandrin’s ideas therefore are of no value to me.

and applying the same reasoning, you therefore also equally agree that,

-3- Homer’s ideas and concepts are scientific in nature
-4- Homer’s ideas are therefore of no value to me, Erik_K.

Erik_K, you can’t have it both ways. If you want to discuss, than do so, but please spare me your incoherent spacious romantic self-contradictory babbling.

I take back what I said earlier, I want to see the wiggling out of this one. Excellent post mandrin.

 

[MizunoJoe]

quote:Originally posted by Erik_K

Has this guy's posts done anything to help another's swing?

Not a real swing! []

In mandrin's world, the clubhead is just a weight on a string twirling in 2 dimensions on graph paper.

 

[JohnThomas1]

quote:Originally posted by MizunoJoe

quote:Originally posted by JohnThomas1

PHEW LOL!! Long time no see Joe

Oh yeah - holen1's forum. Good to see you finally found Brian's site!

Actually i was here a fair bit, but not for ages now. I lost my email addy and the site may have been down for a while. I was at Lynn and Chuck's sites a bit and i really had some informative fun at Brian's here. I am so glad i came back, got some of the video answers and good lord are they good.

 

[Tyler]

The Pepsi Challenge was scientific in nature...it didn't help my golf game.

Pepsi or Mandrin...I'll choose Pepsi. I don't like orange soda.

 

[Erik_K]

quote:Originally posted by mandrin

quote:Originally posted by Erik_K

Has this guy's posts done anything to help another's swing? I have no problem going over what HK did...but I don't find ANY of mandrin's post to be of some use.

Erik_K, don’t go half way, be consistent to maintain some intellectual integrity.

Let’s resume your philosophy -

-1- mandrin’s ideas and concepts are scientific in nature.
-2- mandrin’s ideas therefore are of no value to me.

and applying the same reasoning, you therefore also equally agree that,

-3- Homer’s ideas and concepts are scientific in nature
-4- Homer’s ideas are therefore of no value to me, Erik_K.

Erik_K, you can’t have it both ways. If you want to discuss, than do so, but please spare me your incoherent spacious romantic self-contradictory babbling.

Mandrin,

get back to me when someone, anyone, comes along and says, "mandrin's views of homer's work actually made a difference...they actually helped someone in the real world."

That's the bridge you'll never, ever, cross mandrin. It's one thing to sit in the bleachers and call into question another's work. It's quite another not only say why it is wrong, but to maybe get in the author's head and try to get at what he/she was trying to explain.

Ever grade a student's test, Mandrin? The easy way out is just mark up the paper in red ink and give them a C.

I still don't see where you are making a contribution besides just pointing out a small mistake here or there (maybe you just like arguing for the sake of arguing; I know lots of women who are like that).

I simply fail to see what the overall objective of your constant nitpicking is.

Do you even play golf?

Teach golf?

We are here because we want to learn. I'd say most people here are indeed open minded. I like hearing different takes on the swing. Is your goal to make TGM more concise? Accurate? How about publishing your own take on the swing, for all others to see? How about the 'madrin take on TGM?' Or is simply easier, and fun for you, to throw the book in the air, let it plop on the table and engage in a debate on some small detail such as how Homer used the word 'gyroscope' ?

Go ahead and keep posting, madrin. I'll watch this thread grow take up another 8 pages of responses...until you start the next one...and the next one.

Again, madrin, get back to me when your raving and ranting actually helps clear the fog.

 

[mcflog]

quote:Originally posted by Tyler

The Pepsi Challenge was scientific in nature...it didn't help my golf game.

Pepsi or Mandrin...I'll choose Pepsi. I don't like orange soda.

In this section forum members can discuss and debate the mechanics of the golf stroke and how best to teach, learn and implement them.
Brian Manzella, PGA, G.S.E.D., will moderate the disscussion, as well as discribe and debate his personal opinions on the topics.

That is the description of this part of the forum. Other off topic posts not relating to the golf swing have been deleted in the past. Respond to the thread and nothing else should be allowed. All posts not dealing with mandrins initial observation should be deleted including mine.

 

[mandrin]

quote:Originally posted by MizunoJoe

quote:Originally posted by Erik_K

Has this guy's posts done anything to help another's swing?

Not a real swing! []

In mandrin's world, the clubhead is just a weight on a string twirling in 2 dimensions on graph paper.

“In mandrin's world, the clubhead is just a weight on a string twirling in 2 dimensions on graph paper.”

MizunoJoe likes to add that,

“In Homer’s world golf is restricted to just a hockey stick twirling in 2 dimensions on a board. (1-L)”

 

[bbftx]

The scientific method has 4 steps:
1. Observation and description of phenomena.
2. Formulation of a hypothesis to explain the observations. In physics, this can take the form of a causal relationship or mathematical relationship.
3. Use the hypothesis to predict other phenomena
4. Perform experiments to test the hypotheses.

Homer's "science" does indeed offer a path through all four steps. His models do not require absolute mathematical precision in step 2 to be useful when applied to explain phenomena in different people's golf swings and to help them seek improvements. Scientific models don't have to be exact in every detail to be useful. (e.g. Bohr's Model of the atom is not mathematically accurate, but it is useful in explaining certain atomic phenomena. Ditto for Kelly's models of what happens in various components of the golf swing.

Mandrin's approach is also "scientific" in nature. However, he seems to focus almost exclusively on step 2, demanding mathematical and definitional exactitude to a higher level of precision than is needed to work on a person's golf swing. He lets slight imperfections in Kelley's models stop him from seeing the usefulness in applying such models to working on an actual swing.

e.g. - Gyroscopes. There are two relevant concepts:
Gyroscopic Inertia:
All so known as Rotational Inertia. When any object rotates, it would like to stay in that same state, and it takes a force (or torque) to change this state.

Gyroscopic Precession:
The characteristic that causes the gyroscope to react to an applied force at a point 90-degress away from the point of application, in the direction of its rotation.

Kelley is using gyroscopic inertia as allegorical model. I understand what he's trying to say with his metaphor. Precession is an entirely different concept and not really relevant to his metaphor.