I must admit, birly, that I don't quite follow you there, old boy. Are you talking about gear effect, viz a viz closure rates or am I being rather more unenlightened than usual? You've certainly piqued my interest...
Seriously good impact video (and a Manzella Still)
- Thread starter Brian Manzella
- Start date
- Status
Frans@France
New
The rotation of the face is rather fast and the clubhead is a free body at impact so the left wrist rotation rate AT IMPACT has no relation what so ever with the rotation rate of the clubhead at impact.
Seems to me that then the correct question is : At what moment is which body movement responsible for the clubhead rotation at impact? Maybe the moment the < ? body part > has got to it's maximum acceleration of rotation?
I do however like this reply
I'm still looking for the "magic move" to control face angle
So, there ARE different rates of closure, but it is claimed (and this would seem to have at least some truth) that they have NO relationship to consistency and ball control.
Now we need some data to be processed by a scientist to validate or disprove the claim. Everything else is just daytime TV. Next!
Now we need some data to be processed by a scientist to validate or disprove the claim. Everything else is just daytime TV. Next!
birly-shirly
New
Sorry if I wasn't clear Oliver - but it wasn't anything profound. You were asking about practical applications and whether this discussion mattered. All I was saying was that we know the importance of the point on the clubface where impact occurs - but we don't seem to know very much about how to influence it.
If there are gaps in our knowledge about how to control the clubface, it still seems to me that we are further along the path to enlightenment on this point.
birly-shirly
New
I think we need to be careful around this point. As I understand it, the "free body at impact" issue means that off-centre impact causes clubface rotation that the wrists are powerless to control within the impact interval. But it seems to me that the reverse is not true. If the hands are rotating at 1800* through impact, the causative forces aren't being applied with anything like the force, or suddenness, of an off-centre collision - and I expect that rotation of the hands is effectively transmitted to the clubface.
In other words - the clubface might not control hand rotation, but hand rotation still controls clubface rotation (and therefore alignment) until the ball intervenes.
Brian Manzella
Administrator
David Duval and Payne Stewart.
One WIDE OPEN at impact, on NOT SO OPEN at impact.
David's face did very little closing right after impact (even though it was undoubtedly more closed at impact).
Payne's face did a decent amount of closing right after impact (even though it was undoubtedly more closed at impact).
Pretty much every good player's hips slow down to a crawl at some point at the bottom of the swing.
David's hips didn't slow down until well past impact.
Payne's hips slowed much earlier.
They didn't swing the same, ya see....
One WIDE OPEN at impact, on NOT SO OPEN at impact.
David's face did very little closing right after impact (even though it was undoubtedly more closed at impact).
Payne's face did a decent amount of closing right after impact (even though it was undoubtedly more closed at impact).
Pretty much every good player's hips slow down to a crawl at some point at the bottom of the swing.
David's hips didn't slow down until well past impact.
Payne's hips slowed much earlier.
They didn't swing the same, ya see....
Seems like we're comparing thousandths of a second difference with face closure rates and every face is closing no matter what the shot and that it's up to the golfer to time this action. No easy way out when it comes to timing but through practice and God given talent.
I think we can easily "fix" path and attack angle issues which aren't flying around at thousandths of a second.
I think we can easily "fix" path and attack angle issues which aren't flying around at thousandths of a second.
Who says the Aoa isn't changing at a fast rate? I'd have to see some hard numbers. Even it changed 1 degree in that .0025 second that's still 300 degrees/sec. The "new release" includes an important element of a rising hand path, and so there definitely is a dynamic set of structures involved.
Dariusz J.
New member
Too general a statement, Wulsy. They of course matter but in the big picture. A well timed crossover release will give an exact look of the clubface in the frame Brian presented to another two release types.
Cheers
Dariusz J.
New member
Yes, I'd tend to agree, provided we assume that release type is an effect, not a cause. Say, compare two golfers, both with crossover release -- one uses this type of release because his overall motion forces him to do; the other's goal is to crossover because e.g. somebody told him that it will give him 10 more yards. Are you with me ?
Cheers
Yes. I don't know how to "time" my face other than through practice. I can improve my path and attack angle very easily, face is much, much harder to control. Even if I knew the rate of my face closure I'm not sure if I can make instant changes like I can with path and attack angle. I can feel those quick changes. Face angle, hardly at all.
Dariusz J.
New member
CWD, you're a wise man.
I will tell you this, for what it's worth (while being far far away to be an expert in microscale, thus take it with a grain of salt) -- there are two absolutes: a. the face must open toward the arc because of anatomy; b. the face must re-close to hit the ball. While opening the face in the backswing is just a mechanical necessity, the way of closing the face leaves options to choose. And I do not mean the option to choose crossover deliberately to add yards. I mean options to anatomy and subconscious mind. There are many successfull crossover release players and it would be and utmost stupidity to try to change it if it works well despite some "face closure vs. timing" issues. Having said this, however, I'd propose a 'tabula rasa golfer' to promote scenarios that are more timing-proof if -- I repeat -- the goal is repeatability.
Cheers
Thanks. I have my 10,000 hours, just not a virtuoso. Golf is hard. Trackman has changed my path and attack angle for the better. Face angle is always a work in process.
I suspect the reason I like full shots is that my face angle is more repeatable than with half shots where things don't feel as repeatable. My path is solid and I can repeat around 1* with ease regardless of how hard I swing.
Practice is the hard part. Life gets in the way!
I suspect the reason I like full shots is that my face angle is more repeatable than with half shots where things don't feel as repeatable. My path is solid and I can repeat around 1* with ease regardless of how hard I swing.
Practice is the hard part. Life gets in the way!
I'm sure you are right. But maybe I am too. I checked one of those 10,000 fps videos and aoa change a lot per sec coming into impact.
Frans@France
New
same here!
yes, this is one thing i learned from TM as well. misses i thought were swingpath were very often clubface angle or off-center contact. swingpath is a LOT easier to repeat than clubface angle. i'm always thinking of ways to square up that clubface more consistently. even if you could find a tweak that turned those 10000 hours into 8000, or squared it up with 10% more accuracy, you could make big improvements in peoples' games.
- Status