pivot question

[nmgolfer]

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

Yes... you did.

http://www.brianmanzella.com/forum/showpost.php?p=115680&postcount=129

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.

I'm not against optimizing accuracy. That's critical but ballspeed is clubhead speed. They're synonymous. Kwh? Power? I that's married to efficiency which is exaclty what I'm taking about. Max club head speed minimum effort.

mandrin believes in some yin-yang hand slowing yeilding more from less nonsense. From what I gather he thinks hand torque at some point changes direction... positive becomes negative, more equals less (it doesn't). I believe in in preserving lag while building hand speed through optimizing hand path culminating in an explosive unleashing into impact. i.e. Maximizing both hand speed and and angular velocity. Better players put 80% of their effort in the last stage of the downswing (don't ask me to site the source, I just remember reading it).

Math can answer your question and its not a very difficult problem either... just a task... drudgery. Last year I told readers of this forum exactly how to do it. Have you got Microsoft excel?

 

[golfspike]

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...

Back tees proper tournament conditions and those high 70's will become 90's + . Worry about your own swing not theirs

 

[dashfan87]

Back tees proper tournament conditions and those high 70's will become 90's + . Worry about your own swing not theirs

Im done...

Because I'm allowing myself to get way too worked up over people, that, for one I have no idea who they are, (remember you don't know me from Adam either) and two, the scientific mumbo jumbo is out of my league, however, that in no way makes me stupid, or irrelevant, only on this topic(golf science). So, I'm stepping away, and I'm going to worry about MY swing.

My only thing was, if they think they have all the freaking answers, post up some proof of their own, that they at least have a handicap of under 10... like myself. I maynot be as scientifically gifted as them, but I am still an above average golfer.
They brought on the personal stuff, when they decided I was irrelevant.

Oh, I play from the tips, and I really have no interest in playing any tournaments. so I doubt Ill be seeing the 90s any time soon...

Have fun with your "pivot" debate... that was the origins of the thread right?

 

[Bronco Billy]

Nesbit........

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.

.

 

[Bronco Billy]

This Path of Least Resistance Generates Maximum Club Head Speed With Minimal Effort..

Yes... you did.

http://www.brianmanzella.com/forum/showpost.php?p=115680&postcount=129



I'm not against optimizing accuracy. That's critical but ballspeed is clubhead speed. They're synonymous. Kwh? Power? I that's married to efficiency which is exaclty what I'm taking about. Max club head speed minimum effort.

mandrin believes in some yin-yang hand slowing yeilding more from less nonsense. From what I gather he thinks hand torque at some point changes direction... positive becomes negative, more equals less (it doesn't). I believe in in preserving lag while building hand speed through optimizing hand path culminating in an explosive unleashing into impact. i.e. Maximizing both hand speed and and angular velocity. Better players put 80% of their effort in the last stage of the downswing (don't ask me to site the source, I just remember reading it).

Math can answer your question and its not a very difficult problem either... just a task... drudgery. Last year I told readers of this forum exactly how to do it. Have you got Microsoft excel?

.

 

[mandrin]

As expected, no trace of any explanation. Just bellowing, as usual.

Nesbit........

.

 

[dbl]

(re Nesbitt)
Yes... you did.
(snip)

Oh, well not in THIS thread. But his analysis is neither here nor there really, just fodder.

The meat is this: if for someone like Tiger Woods or JB Holmes it is shown that their hands slow down, and the claim is then made that they could be more efficient with a different hand action, and that that hand action will yield more clubhead speed (and that those golfers won't sacrifice any accuracy or other optimization they may be seeking), then I think the person making the claim has some answering to do about why those golfers' choices and actions in reality don't correspond to the claimant's theory.

 

[DP3]

What we've learned

Correct me if I'm wrong

The radius is measured from the tip of left shoulder to clubhead. (rhg)

Players can increase clubhead speed by shortening this radius with proper timing.

Movement of the left shoulder moves the circle and does not change the radius.

There are only three ways to alter the radius, and they are;
+ bending the left elbow on the way down
+ bending the left wrist on the way down
+ bending the clubshaft on the way down

Speculation based on the above being true;
The best golfers bend their left elbows on downswing just enough to keep the radius tightening. The power this creates is attributed to turning the clubhead through impact by a multitude of teachers and pros. However, it might just be that it is more efficient for some to turn the elbow at the same time they are putting a slight bend in it.

Hogan bent his elbow a little on downswing.

 

[nmgolfer]

No and No...

Correct me if I'm wrong

The radius is measured from the tip of left shoulder to clubhead. (rhg)

Imagine a curve any curve. At any location on said curve there is an instantaneous center of curvature. The distance from the center of curvature to the corresponding point on the curve is the "radius" I refer to. Visualize the path the hands take. That curve at every point has an instantaneous center of curvature. When I speak of radius it is the distance from the instantaneous center of curvature to the hands. The radius has nothing to do with the left shoulder.

I think mandrin wrote something about this once and he had that one correct.

Players can increase clubhead speed by shortening this radius with proper timing.

Movement of the left shoulder moves the circle and does not change the radius.

There are only three ways to alter the radius, and they are;
+ bending the left elbow on the way down
+ bending the left wrist on the way down
+ bending the clubshaft on the way down

Speculation based on the above being true;
The best golfers bend their left elbows on downswing just enough to keep the radius tightening. The power this creates is attributed to turning the clubhead through impact by a multitude of teachers and pros. However, it might just be that it is more efficient for some to turn the elbow at the same time they are putting a slight bend in it.

Hogan bent his elbow a little on downswing.

Everything else you said I disagree with. I especially disagree with the notion of bending the left elbow although there are good players that manage it.... just as there are good players who's hands slow before impact. Each player is arrives at combination of compromises that he/she makes work for himself/herself.

All this talk has reach futility stage. Only a analytical simulator would "teach" non-believers that what I say (and Nesbit said) is true. I think maybe the time has come that I shall invest the time & effort.

 

[nmgolfer]

Oh, well not in THIS thread. But his analysis is neither here nor there really, just fodder.

The meat is this: if for someone like Tiger Woods or JB Holmes it is shown that their hands slow down, and the claim is then made that they could be more efficient with a different hand action, and that that hand action will yield more clubhead speed (and that those golfers won't sacrifice any accuracy or other optimization they may be seeking), then I think the person making the claim has some answering to do about why those golfers' choices and actions in reality don't correspond to the claimant's theory.

Again... its up to you to prove their hands slow down. I don't believe it. Pointing to a youtube doesn't cut it. You say they slow I say they don't and to me it is just as "obvious" as it is to you. Show me the data.

 

[Bronco Billy]

Why Does Birdie_Man's Golfclub Starts Short,Gets Longer,and then Gets Short Again?

 

[jmessner]

Club is closer to camera at Impact!

 

[Bronco Billy]

Might This Also Distort the Pictorial SlowDown proof???????????

.

 

[jmessner]

Well....

.

the hand plane between release start (A) and impact (B) isn't that different, but I would actually think the closer to the camera view would make the hands look farther apart (per frame) not closer together with a constant rotation angle. Think about how far the hands would appear to travel if viewed at say 10ft vs 1000 ft.

 

[holeout]

If anything, it would make the hands look like they were moving faster, not slower.

Did you really not even think of that BB? Come on now, you didn't expect us to not call you on that one, did you?

 

[DP3]

NMGolfer "That curve at every point has an instantaneous center of curvature. When I speak of radius it is the distance from the instantaneous center of curvature to the hands. The radius has nothing to do with the left shoulder."

Thank you, that makes more sense.

Yes, more explanations for the non-scientist types would be great.

 

[Bronco Billy]

We Both Agree 2D Measurements are Distorted.. Nesbit is a 3D Analysis...

the hand plane between release start (A) and impact (B) isn't that different, but I would actually think the closer to the camera view would make the hands look farther apart (per frame) not closer together with a constant rotation angle. Think about how far the hands would appear to travel if viewed at say 10ft vs 1000 ft.

.

 

[mandrin]

All this talk has reach futility stage. Only a analytical simulator would "teach" non-believers that what I say (and Nesbit said) is true. I think maybe the time has come that I shall invest the time & effort.

I advise not. Better simply keep promising year in year out. It saves you the embarrassment possibly finding the truth and having to admit being totally wrong. Whilst not knowing you can keep going on treating the whole world, including respectable scientists, as being not up to your magnificent erroneous standards. So take my friendly advice, better hang on to your naive ideas - otherwise it might possibly shatter your sweet little inflated ego.

 

[dbl]

I'm not sure if this has been shared here, but here is a report from Phil Cheetham a staffer at the Titliest Performance Insititute. The report shows arm slowing near impact, except for one poor amateur who tries to accelerate the arms.

The pdf is free from TPI, but is more accessible via this link:
http://www.advancedmotionmeasurement.com/Articles/KinematicSequence-TransitionandDownswing.pdf

Info on Phil at TPI
http://www.mytpi.com/staff_bios.asp?bioP=P_Cheetham%

 

[Bronco Billy]

If the Arm Slows NEAR Impact The Slowing is Independent of the Release...

I'm not sure if this has been shared here, but here is a report from Phil Cheetham a staffer at the Titliest Performance Insititute. The report shows arm slowing near impact, except for one poor amateur who tries to accelerate the arms.

The pdf is free from TPI, but is more accessible via this link:
http://www.advancedmotionmeasurement.com/Articles/KinematicSequence-TransitionandDownswing.pdf

Info on Phil at TPI
http://www.mytpi.com/staff_bios.asp?bioP=P_Cheetham%

.