pivot question

[pecky987]

DBL, Remember when you misinterpreted Nesbit's graphs? You're doing the same thing with the bull whip. They're complex things involving wave propagation, conservation of momentum and energy. And they have nothing to do with golf: http://math.arizona.edu/~goriely/Papers/2002-PRL(whip).pdf

You are right about one thing though. That equation does not require hand velocity to be increasing. We've all seen golfer's who's hands do slow down.

http://www.newgolfswing.com/images/newgolfswing08_clip_image016.jpg
Some who slow their hand are even "good" golfers. However, that does not mean they optimize their effort and in turn club head speed.

genuine question here. who is the golfer in that picture? its quite clear from that picture that their hands slow. if we know their identity then we can start to decide whether players should slow their hands to become 'good' players

 

[Bronco Billy]

I Think It's Birdie_Man... It Looks Like His Avatar.....

genuine question here. who is the golfer in that picture? its quite clear from that picture that their hands slow. if we know their identity then we can start to decide whether players should slow their hands to become 'good' players

 

[thefuture37]

It's like watching TV. I hate reality shows and dance competitions. I don't watch them. People who agree with Dashfan and thefuture37 should not read this thread. They're entitled to their opinion but they should go elsewhere and learn to live and let live.

I am just bringing a third side into the debate. The side that says that the info debated doesn't matter in the real world. Its not a matter of "liking" or "hating".

 

[nmgolfer]

Shut it down Brian....

genuine question here. who is the golfer in that picture? its quite clear from that picture that their hands slow. if we know their identity then we can start to decide whether players should slow their hands to become 'good' players

I give up...... Pecky knowing who the player is tells you NOTHING! If mandrin is not go to play this discussion is futile... suggest you send this one to the deep freeze. I'm out-a-here.

"People with hear what they want to hear and ignore the rest" - le mandrin (elsewhere on this forum)

 

[magic43]

genuine question here. who is the golfer in that picture? its quite clear from that picture that their hands slow. if we know their identity then we can start to decide whether players should slow their hands to become 'good' players

pecky,

I believe that I read that Joe Dante said that the golfer in question was Jimmy "Titanic" Thompson. One of the longest hitters of that era. Quite a good golfer and definitely not some duffer!

 

[dashfan87]

It's like watching TV. I hate reality shows and dance competitions. I don't watch them. People who agree with Dashfan and thefuture37 should not read this thread. They're entitled to their opinion but they should go elsewhere and learn to live and let live.

Heres the thing, I don't mind looking at other opinions of how the club should be swung. In fact I love it, thats how you find out what does and does not work.
However you guys are just out to forum brawl with anyone who will take the opposite side. I don't know if you even truly agree with whats coming out of your own mouth, or if you are just getting your jollies from ticking off a group of people, Brian Manzella himself, and a "man(derin)" who you clearly have prior beef with... Thats a rhetorical question I really could care less why.
The FACT of the matter is, there are 1000 other professional golfers (ranked) in the world, who are swinging the club different from your view of "the most optimum way to do it" and can out shoot, out score, AND out drive the hell out of you. period.
The part about me being a better golfer, while it cant be proven. Is also, I'm sure, True.

I didnt give you any "knowledge" just the truth in real world basis, no science needed... so have fun with that.

 

[nmgolfer]

Dashfan... with all due respect you add nothing the discussion. You're full of yourself and you have no clue what your're talking about. Golfing since 3 and and still nowhere near par? Give it up big boy.

 

[dashfan87]

Dashfan... with all due respect you add nothing the discussion. You're full of yourself and you have no clue what your're talking about. Golfing since 3 and and still nowhere near par? Give it up big boy.

and Im full of myself... wow...

and give it up? come on, its a game, a game I love to play... who cares if Im not GREAT, Im good, better than about 90 percent of the golfing population. Im happy with that, and happy that I can shoot in the 70s, thats pretty damn good, for a guy who plays about once or twice a month, with very little practice. Just so you know, I started when i was 3, stopped when I was about 8, and started again when I was 16. The fact that I went from shooting well into the hundreds, at 16 when i came back, to the 70s in 4 years, again with little practice other than just playing, is an accomplishment.

Now, Mr. "Imsosmartscientist" why dont you use some of that education, and "knowledge" you have, and stop acting like a child.

still waiting on you guys to post your videos, and handicaps. all knowing ones...

 

[birdie_man]

Some of y'all may not be interested in this stuff (I am but do not dig all of these kinds of threads) but I don't think the real issue should be practicality.........I think it is about whether or not any of these arguments actually hold any weight or if this is gonna go around in circles. (for who knows what intentions)

To me.

Not that it is up to me to decide but...

 

[pecky987]

Dashfan... with all due respect you add nothing the discussion. You're full of yourself and you have no clue what your're talking about. Golfing since 3 and and still nowhere near par? Give it up big boy.

and another falls to the wicked wit of NM

 

[thefuture37]

I think it is about whether or not any of these arguments actually hold any weight

do you mean like hold any weight in a court of law? or hold any weight for teaching/learning the golf swing? if its the latter than your statement is the definition of practicality.

 

[birdie_man]

future- I mean "hold any weight" in the fairly golf-scientific discussion that this is.

i.e. are we getting anywhere.

I really don't know. And I initially was interested in this thread.

But I trust Brian and mandrin.

I am taking the Curtis One-Site-Only (this site) approach nowadays, BTW. To avoid info. overload and to keep me sane and not so scattered with ideas and tasks.

BTW I don't know much about 3D machines but it sounds like pretty concrete information to me. The only arguments the detractors really have it would seem are:

1. The machines are all broken.

2. Brian is fibbing.

3. Though many golfers of different abilities and with different swings I am sure have already been tested and showed what now seem to be predictable results (with the main point being- good swings "snap the chain"), there are a few good golfers (especially if they are good enough to really make it matter at all) who do it differently.

BTW again- to me, the people who aren't interested in this stuff at all pretty much just won't read it I presume.

BTW 9.0- Brian HAS acknowledged differences in the timing of chain snappage and acknowledged other such related elements and how they affect other components. At this point this is what interests me most while we're on this particular topic.

 

[curtisj76]

I am taking the Curtis One-Site-Only approach. (to avoid info. overload and to keep me sane and not so scattered with ideas and tasks... )

birdie_man only 1 golf site?????? NO WAY! You must have at least 20K posts out there don't you? You should seriously count them.

 

[birdie_man]

I am embarrassed, Curtis.

lol...

 

[dbl]

DBL, Remember when you misinterpreted Nesbit's graphs? You're doing the same thing with the bull whip. They're complex things involving wave propagation, conservation of momentum and energy.

To be clear, I haven't mentioned Nesbit. That might be someone else.

You are right about one thing though. That equation does not require hand velocity to be increasing. We've all seen golfer's who's hands do slow down. Some who slow their hand are even "good" golfers. However, that does not mean they optimize their effort and in turn club head speed.

I do question the premise that optimizing effort has to lead to the most advanced club head speed. I see the premise in play all the time. However, one can optimize for other factors, even say, accuracy, or perhaps some complex thing like ballspeed/erg or kwh...but the goals are set by individuals. So, for the present, for the case of someone who WANTS to have the most clubhead speed while decelerating the hands, I wonder what mathematics would yield to help them with the process.

 

[Bronco Billy]

This Thread Has Muted Into a Political Thread From a Scientific Thread......

future- I mean "hold any weight" in the fairly golf-scientific discussion that this is.

i.e. are we getting anywhere.

I really don't know. And I initially was interested in this thread.

But I trust Brian and mandrin.

I am taking the Curtis One-Site-Only (this site) approach nowadays, BTW. To avoid info. overload and to keep me sane and not so scattered with ideas and tasks.

BTW I don't know much about 3D machines but it sounds like pretty concrete information to me. The only arguments the detractors really have it would seem are:

1. The machines are all broken.

2. Though many golfers of different abilities and with different swings I am sure have already been tested and showed what now seem to be predictable results (with the main point being- good swings "snap the chain"), there are a few good golfers (especially if they are good enough to really make it matter at all) who do it differently.

BTW again- to me, the people who aren't interested in this stuff at all pretty much just won't read it I presume.

BTW 9.0- Brian HAS acknowledged differences in the timing of chain snappage and acknowledged other such related elements and how they affect other components. At this point this is what interests me most while we're on this particular topic.

.

 

[birdie_man]

Yes bronco.

Anyway- Curtis. Apparently I lied! The very mention of other forums tickled my curiousness and now I am about to go forum-nuts again.

I must and will use restraint though. Especially on this Friday night.

And with a whimper I'm fudging splitting, Jack.....!!

 

[Bronco Billy]

This is Contradictory.... Therefore False.....

To be clear, I haven't mentioned Nesbit. That might be someone else.



I do question the premise that optimizing effort has to lead to the most advanced club head speed. I see the premise in play all the time. However, one can optimize for other factors, even say, accuracy, or perhaps some complex thing like ballspeed/erg or kwh...but the goals are set by individuals. So, for the present, for the case of someone who WANTS to have the most clubhead speed while decelerating the hands, I wonder what mathematics would yield to help them with the process.

.

 

[jmessner]

I understand people have made that claim (tiger's hands slow)... I've never seen it proven. If he does, it simply means even he has room for improvement.

Vhands and w are independent although the magnitude w does depend on Delta Vhands i.e. hand acceleration). The equation I gave you is valid everywhere and anytime during the swing.

Pendulums are by def. gravity powered. The golf swing is not. (That problem that can be overcome). Pendulums have a fixed central pivot. Golf does not (Jorgenson, in trying to make a pendulum come close to matching a real golf swing, found he had to let the central pivot translate). Pendulums have fixed radii (circular paths). That is a problem that cannot be overcome.

Re: Tiger - Brian posted a high speed video here sometime ago. Check it out frame by frame. Not a 3D machine measurement though. If we're talking pure clubhead speed only (I almost can't remember what we're talking about), then Tiger's not the best example - we need a Long Drive guy. Of course, that makes one wonder if there's a limit to how much clubhead speed a person can actually control and be accurate enough to shoot low scores.

Yes, I already agreed your equation was instantaneously valid, but still don't think you can predict w from just that equation. More info on Vhands is needed - to me that's dependence.

Jorgensen started with a pendulum added torques, and a central pivot linear acceleration followed by deceleration (which is quite interesting in itself BTW). Now, if he just would have had the central pivot move in an almost elliptical path to simulate left shoulder movement, I think his model would have been more interesting.

 

[mandrin]

Originally Posted by dbl
So, for the present, for the case of someone who WANTS to have the most clubhead speed while decelerating the hands, ....

Originally Posted by BB
This is Contradictory.... Therefore False.....

Bronco Billy, would you mind leaving the title space alone for a change and explain more in detail why and how you forged such strong opinion. I am most interested to hear your scientific arguments.