Jamie Sadlowski's vist to TWU

[Brian Manzella]

I talked to Young-Hoo and Chris yesterday on Skype about the Sadlowski data.

It was all very interesting.

Can't tell you anything right now before official publication, but some folks that have looked at it in 2d and with 3D kinematics, without having any idea of the kinetics involved and the very detailed look at the ground reaction forces, are 180° in error in their assumptions about important details pre-impact at at impact.

Without understanding forces and torques and ground reaction forces, analyzing golf swings are a really poor guess.

Teaching AFTER THE FACT positions without knowing the forces and torques needed at the handle and at the ground (the only 2 things the golfer is in direct contact with) is hoping for the best and infinitely inferior to the hand path and the forces and torques.

Always was, always will be.

 

[wulsy]

Do you mean you were right and they were wrong? Looking forward to the results.

 

[Brian Manzella]

This has nothing to do with a bunch of non-scientists and non-qualified scientists finding out whether or not their GUESSTIMATES were right or wrong.

Since we started Project 1.68, we have found plenty of our guesstimates were wrong. We took it like men and told on ourselves and added the new correct information to our teaching.

Everyone knew Jamie decelerated a bunch in the downswing 3 years ago. How he did it wasn’t even close to being known until now.

It is amazing how far off you can be looking at just movements in the golf swing.

It really doesn’t matter if looking at those movements are done with video at any speed, or a motion capture.

Without a good understanding of the ONLY TWO CONNECTIONS THE GOLF HAS WITH THE WORLD—the ground and the club—and how forces, torques work on both of them, you’ll be guessing for the next 100 years.

I don’t like guessing.

There are basically only two group of folks that are part of “the resistance” to real lab-quality science, synthesized by the very best instructors in the world, and they will both die on the vine.

 

[wulsy]

So when are the results/interpretations coming?

 

[Brian Manzella]

Wusly, I personally heard a half-hours worth of Jamie swing explanation from the data that I could fill up a notebook with the details. That was just the tip of the iceberg.

They are going to put something official out, but a lot of the good stuff that interests me and the rest of the guys won't be available any other way then to visit TWU and ask the right questions. They ain't writing a book.

The comedy/tragedy of folks trying to figure out what Kwon and Como might say about that swing, or what the data says, (especially when it is interpreted correctly) is more sad then anything else. Not even in the vicinity of the depth of knowledge of these two guys. I wish I had time to go get my Masters degree from Kwon. And then another from Duffy. And then MacKenzie, Nesbit, and Zick.

But I am friends with all of those guys, and with Paul Wood and Art. Now I have access to the smart guys at Callaway as well. So, I'll keep pushing the envelope.

I 've spent my whole life learning about the golf swing.

I've been flown all over the world to talk about it.

And now I have to deal with folks that don't even want to get it right.

It is NOT just one guy and his 6 friends either, it is the whole 2d-stills is science crowd who are, I guess, understandably trying to hold on to ideas that they know, and fit their ideal's comfort zone. The fact that they are so far from being scientifically correct is easy to understand—golf pros aren't PHDs, not even close, not Master Degreed (except for Como) and there is just no way to guess all of this stuff that the science a solid good of scientists collectively know. Impossible.

Just like every other method that has ever come out, both like to show video and still 2D befores and afters. I used to do that back in the late 80's and early 90's. Obviously, TrackMan before and afters are way more relevant, but neither are as relevant as scores in real high-end tournaments and whether or not you are moving the bar in such as way that your stuff will stand the test of time.

The fact that the faux-science folks and the "we know more than the scientists" phantoms have made a pact to not go after each other, as long as they both resist the movement toward science is the saddest thing of all. I genuinely feel sorry for them.

I understand how friends of mine have their own issues with both groups of "the resistance." You can't tell grown men, golf pros or PHDs how to conduct themselves. It is still a free country. Some of them do the exact opposite of what I advise. But that is their right.

For me, I'll be happy to voice my opinions, concerns or disagreements in principle, in person, with any of the yellow bookers or spin-off groups.

But the other folks? I don't negotiate with terrorists.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Sorry, I forgot to answer Wulsy....

They want to write something really good and it should come out fairly soon. It can't be anything commercial due to their agreement with Jamie.

We will put out as much of it out as we can, as we always do. You don't see any other instruction group putting all their study out for basically free besides us.

To think there was someone who said that a combined ground reaction force vector (about 5% of the data is cGRF vector stuff) was a made up term by a scientist (Dr. Kwon) looking for recognition...I can't wait to tell Mike Duffey when I visit him Sunday morning at the lab at Penn State. He'll get a kick out of it while we watch my cGRF vector on the screen while I am standing on his new lab quality plates.

What does Joe Mayo call that?

Buffoonery.

 

[Brian Manzella]

There is no shame in not having any earthly idea of what you are talking about.

Golfers, Gold Pros, and wannabe undertrained scientists will just never be able to guess the truth.

That's why we learn strictly from the PHDs who do golf research.

 

[Brian Manzella]

One little piece of the puzzle....

When Jamie's combine cop jumps from his left foot to his right, the effect from that point of origin on the swing is...?

 

[Brian Manzella]

There is no shame in not knowing.

There is no shame in guessing so poorly that you try to deflect, deflect.

If you aren't educated in how the golf swing really works scientifically, you might guess horribly or almost not at all. Trust me.


Let's see some good guesses here in this thread.

 

[Brian Manzella]

No guesses?


Geez.....

 

[Brian Manzella]

It has a huge effect on.....

 

[Brian Manzella]

Maybe I need to explain the question in child-like terms....

Jamie's combined center of pressure is, by mid downswing, like every other good player, very leftward in his stance. But just below parallel to the ground of the shaft—pre-impact—that combined center of pressure moves rapidly over to his right foot.

This new point of origin for the combined ground reaction force vector (also the COP) allows him to do WHAT to himself pre-impact, impact and just past....?


That's as simple as I can make it.



Here is sample couple of really bad and incorrect guesses....Allows him to forward bend more....Assists him with keeping his left knee bent.

 

[dbl]

Pull the force normally inward, and prepare post impact for clubhead (and club's weight) being targetward.

 

[holeout]

Add tilt? Cover with the right shoulder? (complete stabs in the dark )

Also, feels nice to break a few year silence. Life, apparently, happens sometimes.

Good to see you, Brian!

 

[wulsy]

Move back?

 

[LDGolf]

Straighten the left leg to create the room to go normal giving an upward angle of attack.

 

[art]

Maybe I need to explain the question in child-like terms....

Jamie's combined center of pressure is, by mid downswing, like every other good player, very leftward in his stance. But just below parallel to the ground of the shaft—pre-impact—that combined center of pressure moves rapidly over to his right foot.

This new point of origin for the combined ground reaction force vector (also the COP) allows him to do WHAT to himself pre-impact, impact and just past....?


That's as simple as I can make it.



Here is sample couple of really bad and incorrect guesses....Allows him to forward bend more....Assists him with keeping his left knee bent.

Dear Dr. Kwon, Brian, Chris and ALL other, as I am, MASSIVELY INTERESTED PARTIES,

I will take a guess at Brian's question, but first :

CAUTION HERE in trying to draw conclusions too quickly as the response times of the instrumentation and 'presentation' of the data are both CRITICAL.

For instance, in the last 90 degrees of the swing, at Jamie's more than 140 MPH swing speed, and over 200 MPH ball speed, impact is probably less than 0.030 seconds from club shaft parallel, so it is CRUCIAL to understand the response time of the instrumentation to be able to know EXACTLY where the COP etc really is at that and any time.

PLEASE DR. KWON, HELP HERE.

Now for the question and my guess. I certainly believe for Jamie and long drive folks where accuracy is not as important as distance (you get 6 balls to record a valid trial on a 60 yard wide grid), all energies lead to developing maximum club head/ball speed and leaving the ground is common, even with both feet.

This produces the need to evaluate the combined ground level COP force vector and its 3D relationship to the center of gravity of whole body to be able to answer the question. Fortunately, at this point in the swing IF THE INSTRUMENTATION ACCURATELY depicts this vector, the analogy to an airplane is easy and proper, and if the CP is in front of the CG, the plane will pitch up etc..

So, in this case, if the vector passes under Jamie's center of mass there will be a clockwise moment created affecting his club angle of attack, and the respective forces IN THE BODY as these ground reaction forces, acting thru the body, will interact with the desire/habit to go normal and develop parametric/radial accelerations to further increase club head velocity.

So, you can see why I am concerned and conservative about the accuracy of the data presentation, and the importance of accurately understanding the combined vectors movement in these last approximate 0.030 seconds before finalizing any conclusions.

But speaking for myself, I am appreciative and indepted to all that have made this test possible, and anxiously await the release of the data/report etc.

Hope that helps.

Respectfully,
art

 

[Billy McKinney]

I'd imagine it allows him to be the centripetal force that causes a high positive AoA and all the parametric acceleration--plus, it'd help him un-hinge all that lag. It's a bit like a hammer-thrower's pivot. (meanwhile, Jamie can out-drive us all from his knees too).

 

[rogue]

Since your calling for guesses, I’ll venture one…

slow, stop, reverse hip rotation

wasn’t there some video showing how Rory McIlroy by ESPN showing that he reverses rotates his hips around impact (for a brief moment)

does Jamie Sadlowski have a similar motion with the hips

 

[Shot Limit]

Maybe I need to explain the question in child-like terms....

Jamie's combined center of pressure is, by mid downswing, like every other good player, very leftward in his stance. But just below parallel to the ground of the shaft—pre-impact—that combined center of pressure moves rapidly over to his right foot.

This new point of origin for the combined ground reaction force vector (also the COP) allows him to do WHAT to himself pre-impact, impact and just past....?


That's as simple as I can make it.



Here is sample couple of really bad and incorrect guesses....Allows him to forward bend more....Assists him with keeping his left knee bent.

Go normal like a mofo? Generate 140 mph of club head speed?