mandrin
New
In golf there kind of two opposing tendencies - 1) forever more complexity and 2) the everlasting search for that single ephemeral and all compassing idea, aiming to make golf very simple.
The first approach is to analyze and measure anything and everything. This is especially made possible with modern technology, which as a prime also is ever more miniaturized. The 3D machinery for measuring ball club impact phenomena is a good example. We have for instance the efforts of Dr Nesbit et al. measuring multiple facets of the golf swing in conjunction with sophisticated mathematical models.
And we have the other tendency, the KISS-type of approach. In this approach one tries to hang the whole complex golf swing ideally onto only one concept, such as single plane, connection, swing the club head, gravity, etc.. Both ways of thinking have their followers.
The know-all approach is very fundamental to many of our endeavors. Yet there is a perhaps point of where it gets perhaps counterproductive. Medical research is perhaps a good example. Publication upon publication, many contradictory, and progress is rather slow and cumbersome. When will cancer research finally emerge with something worthwhile the massive amount of research done and huge money spent?
There is a possibility that golf instruction might go the same direction. Science is good but the problem is that there are too many people around who have only one major preoccupation and that is to make money. In the same way that the marketing of golf clubs are loaded with esoteric pseudo scientific claims it might possibly develop the same way with future scientific type golf instruction.
Many who are aspiring to become descent golfers really do not have the time required to develop and maintain a high quality swing. Hence, a single thought or concept might be indeed be an interesting approach for these types of golfers. However, as everything it can be readily overcooked in the hands of charlatans having no competence but rather an urgent need to quickly fill their pockets.
Biofeedback is kind of a paradox. It relies on very complex brain activity doing something useful for us yet we haven’t any idea how our marvelous brain is doing us this favor, helping us obtaining the desired useful result. Yet notwithstanding the complexity of the input, the brain, the output is usually a very simple indicator of some sort using for example, light, audio, or EEG signals.
Dr. Grober, a professor in applied physics, a passionate scratch golfer, has played and fiddled around many years with his ideas before marketing a practical, easy to use, commercial training aid - the ‘Sonic Golf System’ - based on biofeedback. It is actually typically the opposite type of research when compared to Dr. Nesbit‘s efforts - which are complex, academic, not readily accessible or practical for the average golfer/instructor.
I have analyzed the ‘Sonic Golf System’ for the simple reason that I like it, being deftly designed and using an elegant and efficient transducer concept - the differential transducer approach. It is the type of contributions science is able to make when a scientist is also an avid golfer experimenting on himself for many years ideas and concepts. For those interested just step inside and have a look.
mandrin
The first approach is to analyze and measure anything and everything. This is especially made possible with modern technology, which as a prime also is ever more miniaturized. The 3D machinery for measuring ball club impact phenomena is a good example. We have for instance the efforts of Dr Nesbit et al. measuring multiple facets of the golf swing in conjunction with sophisticated mathematical models.
And we have the other tendency, the KISS-type of approach. In this approach one tries to hang the whole complex golf swing ideally onto only one concept, such as single plane, connection, swing the club head, gravity, etc.. Both ways of thinking have their followers.
The know-all approach is very fundamental to many of our endeavors. Yet there is a perhaps point of where it gets perhaps counterproductive. Medical research is perhaps a good example. Publication upon publication, many contradictory, and progress is rather slow and cumbersome. When will cancer research finally emerge with something worthwhile the massive amount of research done and huge money spent?
There is a possibility that golf instruction might go the same direction. Science is good but the problem is that there are too many people around who have only one major preoccupation and that is to make money. In the same way that the marketing of golf clubs are loaded with esoteric pseudo scientific claims it might possibly develop the same way with future scientific type golf instruction.
Many who are aspiring to become descent golfers really do not have the time required to develop and maintain a high quality swing. Hence, a single thought or concept might be indeed be an interesting approach for these types of golfers. However, as everything it can be readily overcooked in the hands of charlatans having no competence but rather an urgent need to quickly fill their pockets.
Biofeedback is kind of a paradox. It relies on very complex brain activity doing something useful for us yet we haven’t any idea how our marvelous brain is doing us this favor, helping us obtaining the desired useful result. Yet notwithstanding the complexity of the input, the brain, the output is usually a very simple indicator of some sort using for example, light, audio, or EEG signals.
Dr. Grober, a professor in applied physics, a passionate scratch golfer, has played and fiddled around many years with his ideas before marketing a practical, easy to use, commercial training aid - the ‘Sonic Golf System’ - based on biofeedback. It is actually typically the opposite type of research when compared to Dr. Nesbit‘s efforts - which are complex, academic, not readily accessible or practical for the average golfer/instructor.
I have analyzed the ‘Sonic Golf System’ for the simple reason that I like it, being deftly designed and using an elegant and efficient transducer concept - the differential transducer approach. It is the type of contributions science is able to make when a scientist is also an avid golfer experimenting on himself for many years ideas and concepts. For those interested just step inside and have a look.
mandrin
