Hinge Action, Rate of Closure, and what you SHOULD do with the clubface (p9 pic)

[mgranato]

8th grade physics would have educated anyone enough to know this.

The bigger question is there better club paths, hand paths, grips, pivot and leg movements, wrist positions, etc. that would allow it to accelerate at a slower speed thus affecting the rate?

At its simplest level lets take two golfers, Phil Mickelson and David Duval. Both were/are great players but have very different ways that they swing the club. They both can get the club face on the ball at the highest level in the world with swing paths that are very consistant but why was Duval one of the great ball strikers while Phil was wildly inconsistent. I don't believe it was a talent thing.

I see no reason why researching the why's to questions like this is somehow not a worthwhile exercise.

I think an important point to consider is where you go for that research.

You are well exposed to a number of different methodologies and camps, so I'd like to get your impressions on this impact sequence...

Before a discussion turns to more advanced topis like RoC which require extremely sensative equipment to measure, it should be important to know that the very basics, like impact, are well understood from any person(s) conducting such research. Sound reasonable?

 

[spktho]

Junk Science.

Ohhhh lookee here....video....overhead....ooooooh.

I talked to a real scientist from a golf lab at a major university yesterday, and he blew to sky high, any attempt to see rate of closure on 2D video.

Might as well just guess by looking at the ball.

All the scientists I talked to yesterday, DESTROYED the theory.

I love learning.

I have been wondering a bit on what this debate is over. I get it now, if the picture that was taken down of the overhead driver swing was what was being used to "measure" rate of closure, there are huge problems with any "findings" based on that. Then I read some other posts here that are saying there are claims to be able to reverse the face closing just before impact? ayeyayay!

 

[Dariusz J.]

Today, on the phone and emails with several of the game's brightest minds....

The rate of closure theory is falling to pieces.....

Just a look....

No proof.

If you do reduce it, you have to INTRODUCE other, more variable components to make up for it.

If you had a TrackMan you wouldn't spend ONE SECOND on it.

If the face is closing too much through impact, close it less. If it is coming in too open, close it.

Noone says one would like to reduce RoC intentionally. Your arguments are laughable, sorry. Look at the big picture and see that the more pivot-subdued is the swing the RoC is slower, BECAUSE IT MUST BE LIKE THAT ACCORDING TO PHYSICS AND ANATOMY. I cannot wait for representative researches on this ENSO or whatever machine to confirm this simple biophysical truth.

This discussion makes no sense if you reject my arguments claiming that I have no proof.

Cheers

 

[gmbtempe]

I think an important point to consider is where you go for that research.

You are well exposed to a number of different methodologies and camps, so I'd like to get your impressions on this impact sequence...

Before a discussion turns to more advanced topis like RoC which require extremely sensative equipment to measure, it should be important to know that the very basics, like impact, are well understood from any person(s) conducting such research. Sound reasonable?

I want to know about that sequence several frames before the gif is made, from say P6.5 to P7. There is too much going on that could affect the face that could skew what really happened (heal/toe hit, mat, etc). The actual impact interval is less my concern than before, think I stated that on page 3 of this thread.

 

[cwdlaw223]

Noone says one would like to reduce RoC intentionally. Your arguments are laughable, sorry. Look at the big picture and see that the more pivot-subdued is the swing the RoC is slower, BECAUSE IT MUST BE LIKE THAT ACCORDING TO PHYSICS AND ANATOMY. I cannot wait for representative researches on this ENSO or whatever machine to confirm this simple biophysical truth.

This discussion makes no sense if you reject my arguments claiming that I have no proof.

Cheers

Dariusz -

The key is whether the RoC is materially and mangeably slower from one pattern vs. another. If the RoC is merely "100*" slower is that material and manageable? There a qualitative element in the RoC that will need to be addressed. People just don't become better golfers with slower RoCs. The implication is that a slower RoC means an easier ability to square and time the squaring of the face. There is and always will be a level of timing in golf that cannot be avoided no matter what pattern is used. Some people can time it better with certain patterns over others. Just my thoughts. All we have is the "look" of video to determine the closure rate and even the term "closure rate" will need to be defined for a fruitfult discussion.

 

[magicmarker]

Noone says one would like to reduce RoC intentionally. Your arguments are laughable, sorry. Look at the big picture and see that the more pivot-subdued is the swing the RoC is slower, BECAUSE IT MUST BE LIKE THAT ACCORDING TO PHYSICS AND ANATOMY. I cannot wait for representative researches on this ENSO or whatever machine to confirm this simple biophysical truth.

This discussion makes no sense if you reject my arguments claiming that I have no proof.

Cheers

proof, by definition, requires evidence.

 

[mgranato]

I want to know about that sequence several frames before the gif is made, from say P6.5 to P7. There is too much going on that could affect the face that could skew what really happened (heal/toe hit, mat, etc). The actual impact interval is less my concern than before, think I stated that on page 3 of this thread.

Got no idea what the P numbers are, but here is the full sequence...

This is believed to be a teachable technique of slightly closing the face just before impact and then by impact holding it open. The "closed-to-open" release. Is that what you see, or do you see the classic evidence of something else?

 

[gmbtempe]

The collision at impact may distort things, more than like it opened slightly because of that, my concern is before that.

What I do see is a face that squared very early in the sequence which I am assuming, but cannot verify, has less axial rotation going on then one that would be much more open at the beginning of the GIF. I have no idea where that swing came from, who it is, but in general I like the way that face is moving pre impact.

 

[bluebird]

Help me here. It appears that everyone is on the bandwagon of "the rotation amount cannot be changed".

Perhaps there is another explanation for one of techniques I employ to straighten the flightpath when it starts pulling or hooking. That is to simply twist both wrists in the clockwise direction between last parallel till impact.

My intuition is to reverse the rotation. If it's not really reversing the rotation it must be substantially slowing it? Or perhaps changing the path? I just am having a hard time with knowing that the ROC can be increased but not decreased. Doesn't seem logical.

John

 

[Brian Manzella]

WHat SHOULD you do with the clubface?

Let's start with what you'd want to do with face.

1. At last parallel before impact, the face should be slightly toe down (this one is 2°)

2. About 3 golfballs before impact, the clubhead should be dead on its desired path, and face should be just above dead square to that.

3. The Clubface should rotate closed enough to be on the plane of the clubshaft.

4. The Left Hand should "spiderman" toward the target and the right wrist—full after a throw release—so that #3 will happen.


​

Anything beyond this will require SERIOUS manipulation, and would be considered "non-standard."

 

[Brian Manzella]

Listen up folks....



ANYTIME THE FACE KICKS OPEN AT IMPACT THE PATH OF THE CENTER OF GRAVITY OF THE CLUB (WHICH INCLUDES THE LAST 4OR 5 INCHES OF THE SHAFT AT IMPACT) PASSED TO THE LEFT OF THE GOLF BALL.

ANYTIME THE FACE KICKS OPEN...

ANYTIME THE FACE KICKS OPEN...

ANYTIME THE FACE KICKS OPEN...

EVERY TIME THE FACE KICKS OPEN.



And....

Every time the clubhead gets kicked in any direction—which almost always includes DE-LOFTING on an iron shot—the shaft will recover and re-kick hard the other way before everything calms down.

 

[mgranato]

⬆⬆⬆

And something any and every armchair swing theorist should know by now, but sadly...

 

[drewyallop]

⬆⬆⬆

And something any and every armchair swing theorist should know by now, but sadly...

All this was explained by Tuxen at ASII (he says while comfortably reclining in his armchair, glass of white within easy reach). $125 will get you educated folks.

 

[Brian Manzella]

ANYTIME THE FACE KICKS OPEN AT IMPACT THE PATH OF THE CENTER OF GRAVITY OF THE CLUB (WHICH INCLUDES THE LAST 4 OR 5 INCHES OF THE SHAFT AT IMPACT) PASSED TO THE LEFT OF THE GOLF BALL.

Opposite is true with the sweetspot PASSING to the right of the centerline of the ball.

 

[coach]

ANYTIME THE FACE KICKS OPEN AT IMPACT THE PATH OF THE CENTER OF GRAVITY OF THE CLUB (WHICH INCLUDES THE LAST 4 OR 5 INCHES OF THE SHAFT AT IMPACT) PASSED TO THE LEFT OF THE GOLF BALL.

Opposite is true with the sweetspot PASSING to the right of the centerline of the ball.

Isn't that what gear effect is ?? Also according to Tom Wishon the sweet spot is the size of a pin head. So an off center hit would create gear effect. Just trying to wrap my head around all this

 

[Brian Manzella]

Coach...

There is NO SUCH THING as a "sweetspot" per se.

There is a Center of Gravity of the clubhead, and a Center of Mass of the whole club.

If the club's center of mass (which includes the last 4 or 5 inches of the shaft) passes to the right of the ball's centerline, the face will close first and if the ground doesn't delay or distort the club further, the shaft will kick the face back slightly beyond the normal orientation, and then eventually back to normal.

The problem is a inside-out or outside-in instantaneous path of the clubhead at impact may mean that the ball may need to be struck more toward the heel or toe then you would have to on a straight path.

Yes, Gear Effect—Not for Dummies.

 

[mgranato]

Isn't that what gear effect is ?? Also according to Tom Wishon the sweet spot is the size of a pin head. So an off center hit would create gear effect. Just trying to wrap my head around all this

It's also worth noting that it takes very little misalignmentcause to start to see this effect. If the video is clear enough, you can easily see the club head "flash" from the biased impact. It doesn't mean that the shot before it or after it was like that, but it does mean that perticular shot had an off-center element to it. Every one does it from time to time. YouTube has examples of the best players in the world demonstrating it. However, to think that that specific alignment and subsequent clubface reaction is a player controlled/intended move is silly, at best.

 

[bluebird]

If ENSO can measure every and anything, then please request it separate the ROC responsible from normal on plane ( Alpha ) ROC related to the swingspeed, from the ROC applied (Gamma) by the rolling of the distal segments. D also does make a good point that the length of the radius of the arc ( which could be different up to the extent of the golfers arm length) would also change the ROC. So swing pivot styles and release styles are going to alter this ROC. Has it been stated what is the center of their measuring coordinate system, do they adjust the center to the actual pivot center?

 

[Brian Manzella]

ENSO can measure everything.

Trust me, if me and the boys can spend a day on the thing, we will explode many myths.


....it's funny....the REASON why we would find out so much, and others wouldn't....smarts, no allegiance to anything....better group of scientists to help us figure out what we can't....a team that delights in proving each OTHER wrong.


Everyone else would spend all their time defining their stuff.

 

[coach]

Coach...

There is NO SUCH THING as a "sweetspot" per se.

There is a Center of Gravity of the clubhead, and a Center of Mass of the whole club.

If the club's center of mass (which includes the last 4 or 5 inches of the shaft) passes to the right of the ball's centerline, the face will close first and if the ground doesn't delay or distort the club further, the shaft will kick the face back slightly beyond the normal orientation, and then eventually back to normal.

The problem is a inside-out or outside-in instantaneous path of the clubhead at impact may mean that the ball may need to be struck more toward the heel or toe then you would have to on a straight path.

Yes, Gear Effect—Not for Dummies.

Thanks, starting to get a better understanding, I try to get people to get away from the notion of "sweetspot" and get more towards center of gravity, the center of mass explanation really helps.