Brian Manzella
Administrator
The Golfing Machine talks about being able to have the clubface (on a full-bore shot) either go through the ball with no rotation, a rotation that is perpendicular to the plane, and one that is closing like horizontally hung door.
By the time Project 1.68 began, none of us really thought this was possible. But we wore out every golf equipment company and golf scientist to find out if we were correct.
We also included dozens of other crazy scenarios like a super closing face, and faces that can magically impact the ball slightly closed and re-open due to golfer biomechanics.
We got to see super-high speed video and stills and completely amused the scientists with our questions. We never told them where the goofy ideas came from initially, and they often seemed relieved that they didn't come from us.
We never thought asking any of the questions was a waste of time. I'm sure the 5 Keys folks (who asked Fredrik Tuxen enough questions to learn that more rotation on an aligned CoG strike would cause more fade spin—the opposite of what TGM says) didn't think they were wasting anyone's time. They learned something Fredrik already knew and helped inform a bunch of folks with an assist form us.
Most of the questions can be answered in science. Not computer science, but physics, engineering, and mathematics by folks who do this sort of stuff for a living. For major manufactures with millions on the line. For folks like the USGA. That's the kind of folks we have on speed dial.
There is a University modeling all of this currently, and we will be meeting with them early next year. We had a day with a camera that takes 1 million pictures per second with a scientist that does this exact research for a living scheduled last month, but the gentleman had to go out to Carlsbad to meet with an equipment company. We will have this meeting in January. We can't wait. We have another top-secret meeting with another researcher in the next few weeks, partly on impact collision.
We are hardly standing pat.
Between myself, Mike Jacobs and Damon Lucas, we've spent well over $150,000 on technology in the past three years.
No question is a dumb question.
But the subject of ball-flight resulting from off center strikes has been researched to death by folks like Paul Wood and Fredrik Tuxen. To quote Paul directly,
Trust me, if you think you can stand behind David Toms on a PGA Tour range armed with a Casio camera and a line drawing program and tell him with any accuracy at all whether the ball had a plus or minus spin axis (slight fade or draw) you are high on something.
I won't be able to attend the TrackMan users conference next week. I am speaking at PGA meeting in Pennsylvania. It is literally killing me that I might miss something. Trust me, I'll get the full report.
Like I told two guys a long time ago about two teachers they were quite impressed with, "I'll learn whatever they know, and they'll never learn what I know, so they'll never catch me."
That was before I had an army of scientists, and fellow golf pro researchers like Chris Como, who is studying with one of the most brilliant golf swing researchers in the world and actually doing research along side of him. They'll have a published scientific paper out soon.
I'm sure there will be one coming out of the upper east side any day now, right?
By the time Project 1.68 began, none of us really thought this was possible. But we wore out every golf equipment company and golf scientist to find out if we were correct.
We also included dozens of other crazy scenarios like a super closing face, and faces that can magically impact the ball slightly closed and re-open due to golfer biomechanics.
We got to see super-high speed video and stills and completely amused the scientists with our questions. We never told them where the goofy ideas came from initially, and they often seemed relieved that they didn't come from us.
We never thought asking any of the questions was a waste of time. I'm sure the 5 Keys folks (who asked Fredrik Tuxen enough questions to learn that more rotation on an aligned CoG strike would cause more fade spin—the opposite of what TGM says) didn't think they were wasting anyone's time. They learned something Fredrik already knew and helped inform a bunch of folks with an assist form us.
Most of the questions can be answered in science. Not computer science, but physics, engineering, and mathematics by folks who do this sort of stuff for a living. For major manufactures with millions on the line. For folks like the USGA. That's the kind of folks we have on speed dial.
There is a University modeling all of this currently, and we will be meeting with them early next year. We had a day with a camera that takes 1 million pictures per second with a scientist that does this exact research for a living scheduled last month, but the gentleman had to go out to Carlsbad to meet with an equipment company. We will have this meeting in January. We can't wait. We have another top-secret meeting with another researcher in the next few weeks, partly on impact collision.
We are hardly standing pat.
Between myself, Mike Jacobs and Damon Lucas, we've spent well over $150,000 on technology in the past three years.
No question is a dumb question.
But the subject of ball-flight resulting from off center strikes has been researched to death by folks like Paul Wood and Fredrik Tuxen. To quote Paul directly,
"The impact is incredibly complex.
This is what keeps people like me and Fredrik Tuxen in employment!"
The understanding that folks like myself, James Leitz, and Joesph Mayo have on off-center strikes and ball-flight from using TrackMan for years and seeing tens of thousands of shots hit is way better than any non-user would ever imagine.This is what keeps people like me and Fredrik Tuxen in employment!"
Trust me, if you think you can stand behind David Toms on a PGA Tour range armed with a Casio camera and a line drawing program and tell him with any accuracy at all whether the ball had a plus or minus spin axis (slight fade or draw) you are high on something.
I won't be able to attend the TrackMan users conference next week. I am speaking at PGA meeting in Pennsylvania. It is literally killing me that I might miss something. Trust me, I'll get the full report.
Like I told two guys a long time ago about two teachers they were quite impressed with, "I'll learn whatever they know, and they'll never learn what I know, so they'll never catch me."
That was before I had an army of scientists, and fellow golf pro researchers like Chris Como, who is studying with one of the most brilliant golf swing researchers in the world and actually doing research along side of him. They'll have a published scientific paper out soon.
I'm sure there will be one coming out of the upper east side any day now, right?
