Lag Pressure Talk
- Thread starter Ringer
- Start date
- Status
mandrin
New
Ringer,
Excellent, that means that you will have a bit more time to refine your theory about the clubhead changing direction during impact interval. Can’t wait to see you posting about it in more detail.
Cheers.
birdie_man
New
That was a fun exchange to read. (honestly)
...
Anyhoo....I skimmed thru that....
We've been over this in the forum already (with mandrin at the helm).......and the general consensus....and the consensus from the knowledgeable above (Brian and co.) is......
.....that the only stressing of the shaft you have to worry about is so it "kicks" for added SPEED.
......i.e. the reason why a whippy fishing rod hurls the line out further than a rigid one.
This is separate from "adding mass to impact." (SPEED vs. "effective mass")
...
BTW I don't know the dude personally but I'm pretty sure Ringer isn't a "TGM fanboy/cultist."
...
Anyhoo....I skimmed thru that....
We've been over this in the forum already (with mandrin at the helm).......and the general consensus....and the consensus from the knowledgeable above (Brian and co.) is......
.....that the only stressing of the shaft you have to worry about is so it "kicks" for added SPEED.
......i.e. the reason why a whippy fishing rod hurls the line out further than a rigid one.
This is separate from "adding mass to impact." (SPEED vs. "effective mass")
...
BTW I don't know the dude personally but I'm pretty sure Ringer isn't a "TGM fanboy/cultist."
I agree. Ringer is all over the net promoting. He is posts free videos to sell lessons (and sometimes I agree with his advice, sometimes I don't). Nothing wrong with that at all. I am sure he can teach lots of people a thing or two. In reading his posts on other boards, he is not an AI, or a TGM guy. That's fine too. This is not the TGM forum either.
I believe he is trying to learn and figure things out so he can become a better teacher.
Please note: To my knowledge, Ringer has never attempted to sell ANYTHING on Brian's site.
On the other hand, this is a place of business.
Ringer,
Excellent, that means that you will have a bit more time to refine your theory about the clubhead changing direction during impact interval. Can’t wait to see you posting about it in more detail.
Boy aren't you just a funny feller. hardee har har
Would you kindly point me in the direction OF THAT thread since no one else seems to be willing? There seems to be a greater affinity to put people down outside of their own little cult than to actually help people.
Thank you Leek. You're right. I'm trying to be a better teacher and that starts with sharing my ideas. Perhaps somewhat promoting them so they can be challenged, but promoting an idea and not myself. I have a full time job so this is more about helping people and learning than my own self promotion.
I like what Brian teaches and that's why I"m here. There have been plenty of times we've bumped heads but I find his way of teaching interesting and informative.
I'm not a big fan of TGM. I think it has lots of useful information but information alone does not make a player better. It is good for intellectual conversations and hearty debate, but I get easily turned off when it becomes a arrogant pissing contest.
Yes, I got the bit from prev thread about the sequencing, but have never had a clear explanation of HOW you can make it activate (deliberate input -wise)...
As this is the crux of the effectiveness of a golf swing, I think a concise clarification on procedural input to achieve the ideal conditions is required...:
mandrin
New
birdie_man,
Nice to see that the exchange in this thread can still be fun for a veteran poster like you. Some like Leek like to see it meek but a spirited debate is indeed quite fun.
I don’t adhere to the idea that the shaft kicks forward for extra speed and don’t feel that the comparison with a whippy fishing rod is a valid one.
So with all due respect I beg to differ with the general consensus you have noticed to exist.
birdie_man
New
Yikes.
You know what man(drin)......I was just re-reading what I wrote and now that I am out of "typing a message mode" (and into "reading and thinking mode") I was questinoing what the shaft kicking/speed thing myself.
Seems that's how it should work......I guess I just took it for granted.
Either way, I should be more careful....especially when I'm speaking for others.
Thanks.
...
BTW have u already been over that one in another thread? (shaft kick i.e. fishing rod)
...
Ringer....I believe the thread is called "A Helping Hand"? It may be good to do a search on threads started by mandrin because I'm not too sure myself. (maybe mandrin knows?...dunno) Also there is a thread called "ISRAD" from what I remember.
Last edited:
mandrin
New
birdie_man,
I don’t remember having posted comparing golf shaft and fishrods. But I probably will look at shaft issues somewhat more in detail before long. It is already a while ago that I developed the mathematics to cope with the flexing of a shaft but never really used it for posting.
There was once a great debate between a physicist and and an engineer about who is better. To settle it once and for all, someone suggested a test to proof it once and for all. The test encompasses dropping a live chicken from a tower and determining the time taken for the chicken to reach the ground.
The next day, the physicist presented his answer, taking into detailed consideration the feathers of the chicken, the drag of the feathers, the likely wind conditions, the likely number of times the chicken will flap its wings .. etc etc.
When the engineer presented his answer, he started it saying .. "Assume that the chicken is dead and has no feathers ..."
The moral of the story is that researchers of the golf swing are like the physicists, more concern about what is right. The golfer on the other hand is like the engineer, more concern about what works.
As for my personal take on the story and as an engineer myself, I won't debate physics with the physicist. ;-)
cheers,
daniel
The next day, the physicist presented his answer, taking into detailed consideration the feathers of the chicken, the drag of the feathers, the likely wind conditions, the likely number of times the chicken will flap its wings .. etc etc.
When the engineer presented his answer, he started it saying .. "Assume that the chicken is dead and has no feathers ..."
The moral of the story is that researchers of the golf swing are like the physicists, more concern about what is right. The golfer on the other hand is like the engineer, more concern about what works.
As for my personal take on the story and as an engineer myself, I won't debate physics with the physicist. ;-)
cheers,
daniel
mandrin
New
From one chicken problem to another
Your allusion to chickens reminds me that Ringer chickens out in this thread. He starts this thread informing us that he has done a lot of thinking about velocity and lag.
He further alludes to the importance of clubhead changing direction through impact and that he has come to a consensus discussing his ideas with a group of FAA engineers.
Now that we all are prepped and ready to see if we perhaps are being confronted with a chicken-and-egg problem he leaves us high and dry as headless chickens.
daniell,
Your allusion to chickens reminds me that Ringer chickens out in this thread. He starts this thread informing us that he has done a lot of thinking about velocity and lag.
He further alludes to the importance of clubhead changing direction through impact and that he has come to a consensus discussing his ideas with a group of FAA engineers.
Now that we all are prepped and ready to see if we perhaps are being confronted with a chicken-and-egg problem he leaves us high and dry as headless chickens.
daniell,
Your allusion to chickens reminds me that Ringer chickens out in this thread. He starts this thread informing us that he has done a lot of thinking about velocity and lag.
He further alludes to the importance of clubhead changing direction through impact and that he has come to a consensus discussing his ideas with a group of FAA engineers.
Now that we all are prepped and ready to see if we perhaps are being confronted with a chicken-and-egg problem he leaves us high and dry as headless chickens.
You again have your facts all wrong Mandrin. I was the last person to post something of substance followed by your shallow and belittling remarks that had nothing to do with the discussion and more to do with your failure to make friends. Go back and read.
Brian Manzella
Administrator
Blah! Blah! Blah!
Bad thread....
Ya'll miss the moderator.
Let's see if I have the questions correct?
1. Can the fact that the clubhead may be speeding up before impact, create a less decelerated clubhead by the time of separation?
2. Does the clubhead pick up speed from the shaft's bending and subsequent unbending?
Mandrin...you go first.
Bad thread....
Ya'll miss the moderator.
Let's see if I have the questions correct?
1. Can the fact that the clubhead may be speeding up before impact, create a less decelerated clubhead by the time of separation?
2. Does the clubhead pick up speed from the shaft's bending and subsequent unbending?
Mandrin...you go first.
mandrin
New
Ringer,
I keep asking for you to explain tu us your theory about ‘clubhead changing direction through impact’. I am all too willing to discuss but there has to be some sustance on the table, not just chicken meat but real juicy beef.
Brian Manzella
Administrator
Whew!
I'll try again...
Bad thread....
Ya'll miss the moderator.
Let's see if I have the questions correct?
1. Can the fact that the clubhead may be speeding up before impact, create a less decelerated clubhead by the time of separation?
2. Does the clubhead pick up speed from the shaft's bending and subsequent unbending?
Mandrin...you go first.
I'll try again...
Bad thread....
Ya'll miss the moderator.
Let's see if I have the questions correct?
1. Can the fact that the clubhead may be speeding up before impact, create a less decelerated clubhead by the time of separation?
2. Does the clubhead pick up speed from the shaft's bending and subsequent unbending?
Mandrin...you go first.
- Status