Physics

Status
Not open for further replies.
To me....I've always felt like lifting the club up plane seemed "like too much work"....too "forced"....

For my type of swing anyway....for me....

But what do yall think of this general concept?

i.e. physics vs. geometry....

i.e. any difference in power and how much difference....any difference in precision and how much difference...?
 

Burner

New
birdie_man said:
To me....I've always felt like lifting the club up plane seemed "like too much work"....too "forced"....

For my type of swing anyway....for me....

But what do yall think of this general concept?

i.e. physics vs. geometry....

i.e. any difference in power and how much difference....any difference in precision and how much difference...?
It may be stating the obvious to mention this but you might just not know........ so, just in case.

Physics is about forces and motion, and
Geometry is about alignments and angles.

In golf they should work together and not Vie against each other.
 
I realize that Burner....

Generally tho....there's an idea that a Zero Shift is more geometrically "correct"....more ideal....

Whereas John Daly is "all over the place"....

But others would say JD has "better physics".....I think I agree in a way.
 
Last edited:

Burner

New
birdie_man said:
I realize that Burner....

Generally tho....there's an idea that a Zero Shift is more geometrically "correct"....more ideal....

Whereas John Daly is "all over the place"....

But others would say JD has "better physics".....I think I agree in a way.
I thought you might Mate, but I could not see what you were driving at - same as when JD drives, the object is too darned far away!

Curious how such a big bloke can apply so much power in such a delicate fashion once he gets around the green.

I would prefer the reliability of the geometrically correct, Homer would too, I think, over the physical genius that only the likes of the JDs of this world can capture regularly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top