More than 4 Accumulators??

[TGMfan]

quote:Originally posted by mandrin


NAT, would you mind explaining what you mean when you use Homer's concept - 'Effective Clubhead Mass', (2-M-2). I am aware of 'effective mass' as used in physics and quantum mechanics with regard to electrons and semiconductors, but how do you change the 'effective mass' of a clubhead in a golf swing?

Mandrin,

Not NAT, I'm afraid, but "effective mass" is a mechanical concept that's very easily demonstrated with a putter. If F = ma, then effective mass is just the ratio of the force and the acceleration, i.e. m[e] = F/a. When Tiger explains how to "deaden" his putts by hitting the ball with the toe of his club, he's using the same acceleration of the putter head while reducing the force on the ball. Although the actual mass of the putter head hasn't changed, its effective mass has (in this case) decreased proportionally to the force.

In theory, at least, other effects could increase the force to make the effective mass greater than the actual mass of the clubhead. There are enough force-reducing flaws in my golf stroke that I'd be happy just making them the same!

 

[Non-AuthorizedTGM]

Oh, well...theory is just theory....now go apply it....I'm outta here!

 

[holenone]

quote:Originally posted by 6bee1dee

Last year you and Peter on the SA forum ran Lynn over the coals and through the mud (you guys (Peter) banned him from the site) over this very issue of effective clubhead mass.

For the record, Peter didn't ban me. He simply held each of my posts for his personal screening. None were put up on a timely basis -- a day or more was not unusual -- and some he wouldn't post at all. Basically, he unleveled the playing field in an outrageous way, so I left.

 

[TGMfan]

quote:Originally posted by holenone

For the record, Peter didn't ban me. He simply held each of my posts for his personal screening. None were put up on a timely basis -- a day or more was not unusual -- and some he wouldn't post at all. Basically, he unleveled the playing field in an outrageous way, so I left.

Yoda,

I can empathize, as my posts need to be approved by Peter, too; although my "good" posts are merely delayed, my "bad" posts don't show up at all. The ratio so far seems to be about 20% good to 80% bad. I keep plugging away, though, as time and interest allow.

 

[mandrin]

quote:Originally posted by TGMfan

quote:Originally posted by mandrin


NAT, would you mind explaining what you mean when you use Homer's concept - 'Effective Clubhead Mass', (2-M-2). I am aware of 'effective mass' as used in physics and quantum mechanics with regard to electrons and semiconductors, but how do you change the 'effective mass' of a clubhead in a golf swing?

Mandrin,

Not NAT, I'm afraid, but "effective mass" is a mechanical concept that's very easily demonstrated with a putter. If F = ma, then effective mass is just the ratio of the force and the acceleration, i.e. m[e] = F/a. When Tiger explains how to "deaden" his putts by hitting the ball with the toe of his club, he's using the same acceleration of the putter head while reducing the force on the ball. Although the actual mass of the putter head hasn't changed, its effective mass has (in this case) decreased proportionally to the force.

In theory, at least, other effects could increase the force to make the effective mass greater than the actual mass of the clubhead. There are enough force-reducing flaws in my golf stroke that I'd be happy just making them the same!

TGMfan, I don’t have much trouble with ‘effective mass’ when properly used and explained. I am simply asking questions and trying to be a serious student of the game following Homer’s admonition that golf is a game for thinkers.

TGMfan, I wonder if you got inspired by my post on off center impacts with putters which I did some time ago? []

 

[David Alford]

Lynn, that really is too bad...it's not like you do any name calling or ad hominem attacks. What is the website address for the SA forum?

For those interested, I shot the little video clip demo-ing #5 and #6 but am having trouble getting it in my computer due to what appears to be a hardware clich. I'll see what I can do next week to solve that as I'm jammed up the next few days.

 

[David Alford]

mandrin, the golf swing makes logical sense, but because it is so unnatural in the general sense, it is highly resistant to logical penetration.
What helps the most is a video camera. Once one has things figured out, then it can be logically explained to others who don't have their own cameras and/or the time!

 

[holenone]

quote:Originally posted by TGMfan

quote:Originally posted by holenone

For the record, Peter didn't ban me. He simply held each of my posts for his personal screening. None were put up on a timely basis -- a day or more was not unusual -- and some he wouldn't post at all. Basically, he unleveled the playing field in an outrageous way, so I left.

Yoda,

I can empathize, as my posts need to be approved by Peter, too; although my "good" posts are merely delayed, my "bad" posts don't show up at all. The ratio so far seems to be about 20% good to 80% bad. I keep plugging away, though, as time and interest allow.

I admire your tenacity, TGMfan, but...

Why?

 

[Brian Manzella]

It may be of some interest that The Golfing Machine, LLC is getting some physics research done at the University of Washington to test Homer's idea and provide those who must know these things, all of the math.

 

[mandrin]

quote:Originally posted by David Alford

mandrin, the golf swing makes logical sense, but because it is so unnatural in the general sense, it is highly resistant to logical penetration.
What helps the most is a video camera. Once one has things figured out, then it can be logically explained to others who don't have their own cameras and/or the time!

David, I agree with the video being very important. However, video does not show the invisible exertions. Moreover there is also some place for mathematical models.

- Math models can give some understanding of the flail action. Or show clearly that maintaining the angle in the down swing is important. It can clearly demonstrate the idea of kinetic chain. These notions can help establish a sound instructional approach.

- Invisible exertions. Someone like Brian, or any experienced teacher, who has gone through the motions, knows how to translate, what has to be done, into appropriate instructions for very different type of golfers. This is the domain of the invisible exertions. A good example is Yoda demonstrating swinging versus hitting. Nobody can detect the difference however there is a large difference in the associated feeling and intentions in those two type of swings.

- Video is definitely important since we have usually a very different idea of what we think we are doing and what actually place. It is a very objective observer of our imagined golf prowess. However I don’t feel that video alone, working from the outside, can be used to explain logically the inner core feelings of a swing.

 

[David Alford]

Well, I think a swing can be distinguished from a hit, there are sublte clues, but in general one needs very clear and sharp video footage.
However, you're exactly right regarding invisible exertions. E.g., the common advice like "take it back nice and slow"...well how? With the left? The right? Both left and right? The left hand? The left arm? The hapless student has little chance given such generalities.

I don't think Hogan and other great ballstrikers knew the golf swing as well as some of forum members here. But they had an exact forumula plus a lot of practice time. Other than their exact forumula, everything else was irrelevant. And by forumla, I don't mean a mathmatical one; rather their own golf swing "recipe". Hogan's "recipe" and all his secrets can be written in a few sentences. Ditto for Moe Norman's,. etc etc. swing. Why? Because all great swings are simple. And if all great swings are simple, that means they can be described simply. Make sense?

Brian, what in particular is there in TGM that needs to be tested by a University?

 

[rundmc]

quote:Originally posted by mandrin

quote:Originally posted by David Alford

mandrin, the golf swing makes logical sense, but because it is so unnatural in the general sense, it is highly resistant to logical penetration.
What helps the most is a video camera. Once one has things figured out, then it can be logically explained to others who don't have their own cameras and/or the time!

David, I agree with the video being very important. However, video does not show the invisible exertions. Moreover there is also some place for mathematical models.

- Math models can give some understanding of the flail action. Or show clearly that maintaining the angle in the down swing is important. It can clearly demonstrate the idea of kinetic chain. These notions can help establish a sound instructional approach.

Mandrin,

What do you mean by "maintain" the angle? How is it "maintained?" What do you begin with in this calculus of flail action? Are there measurements and what is being measured?

R

 

[MizunoJoe]

quote:Originally posted by mandrin
- Math models can give some understanding of the flail action. Or show clearly that maintaining the angle in the down swing is important.

mandrin - how about a math model to show clearly that breathing is important? []

 

[6bee1dee]

You always change the subject. I explained the way to increase the effective mass of a clubhead, the ability to produce a deliberate, positive and heavy clubhead for the hands to impact the ball with - the way it works on earth and now you are complaining that Homer talks about stressing a shaft with Lag Pressure Points. Homer could care less about shafts- they were strings for Swingers and bats for Hitters. Homer liked stiff shafts for either since the clubhead either whirled or was smashed. The shaft was unimportant- the sweet spot plane was what was important.

And Lag Pressure is important, that is one of those “invisible exertions” YOU cannot see. Lag pressure stresses the shaft at the grip turning the clubhead into that 2lb weight you used as an example. (If you want to learn how to Educate the Hands I suggest checking out the archives, read the book or do a search.)

I would like to know how understanding the math and numbers is a better way to teach golf over learning the concept your numbers prove. Did you learn to drive a car that way? Sex by numbers? (If any). I’m glad you get off plotting numbers but Homer and TGM teaches golf to Joe Duffer (that is what Homer called the golfing public- in the book). You don’t teach golf.

In real words- stop hiding behind you equations like a mask- what is it about the shaft that upsets you? What shafts do you use in your clubs? Homer wasn't a clubmaker but he knew and taught how to "visibly exert" the clubhead behind the clubface into the ball better than anyone.

 

[mandrin]

quote:Originally posted by brianman

It may be of some interest that The Golfing Machine, LLC is getting some physics research done at the University of Washington to test Homer's idea and provide those who must know these things, all of the math.

6bee1dee, someone seems to know what is important. Surely they did not ask your advice.

 

[bts]

It seems to me that anything got stressed/deformed (or "lagged), whether it's moving or not, can be "power accumulator".

 

[6bee1dee]

quote:Originally posted by mandrin

quote:Originally posted by brianman

It may be of some interest that The Golfing Machine, LLC is getting some physics research done at the University of Washington to test Homer's idea and provide those who must know these things, all of the math.

6bee1dee, someone seems to know what is important. Surely they did not ask your advice.

And once again the book for the fourth or fifth time over the last thirty years will be to be sound. They certainly didn't ask you for anything.
I know what is important and you aren't. btw: I love your face - how did you get it so life like?

As I said you always change the subject.

 

[Tom Bartlett]

No one has explained Alford's #6. We agree that the primary lever assembly is the left arm and club. They pivot around the left shoulder. We agree the secondary lever is the club itself. It pivots around the left wrist. If you grip the club conventional or crosshanded it still pivots around the left wrist (accumulator #3). The right hand also pivots AROUND the left wrist so there is no right wrist roll.

 

[David Alford]

If the left wrist rolls, so does the right. Or...if the right rolls, so does the left. If HK was right about the left, I'm right about the right...I don't see them as being identical, however. The left is the left, and the right is the right.

 

[TGMfan]

quote:Originally posted by David Alford

If the left wrist rolls, so does the right. Or...if the right rolls, so does the left. If HK was right about the left, I'm right about the right...I don't see them as being identical, however. The left is the left, and the right is the right.

But, David, neither is the Accumulator. Depending on interpretation, Accumulator #3 either is, or is formed by, the angle between the left forearm and clubshaft at Address. Does your #6 use a different angle?