Synthesis of Transition Ground Reaction Forces

[Dariusz J.]

Force plates ? They would be useless alone even if they were available in the 50-ies and Hogan let measure him and reveal measurements. Watching at them would bring only the knowlege how pressures change without knowing how to do it. The latter is possible either through careful observation or through new scientific methods of measuring what happens in joints -- provided they exist.

Evertyhing is written in the description of the vid on YT, BTW:
"Observe closely Mr.Hogan's rear feet action at setup.
It contains a clockwise turn of the rear ankle and knee joints without changing the rear foot square to the target line position till the limit. Turning the rear heel outwards first (this makes the foot perpendicular to the target) and then turning out both joints. Like one wants to bring your rear heel inwards again, which won't happen because of shear forces between the foot and the ground.
One should imagine that when standing on ice your rear foot would spin outwards because shear forces are practically not present. Since there are a lot of shear forces between one's foot (armed with spikes) and relatively soft ground, a substantial amount of torque is being built. One will feel the torque. One will also see that your rear knee joint bends slightly inwards as a consequence of this action.
It is one of the most importants little secrets of Mr.Hogan aimed at building the firm rear side from the ground up that, consequently, leads to automation of the whole motion."

Your welcome, cheers.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Dariusz,

Saying that force plates are useless and that you can "see" it on video is just like the folks that think they can "see" things without 3D, and "see" angle of attack without radar.

NO CHANCE.

 

[wulsy]

For sure, these devices help us to understand whats happening on the ground, but what happens on the ground is a function of many other aspects.

I can't help feeling that all this stuff is more about the armaments, and not much much about the skill of the warrior. The more arms, the less the warrior needs to develop skill and guile. The cleverer the car, the dumber the driver. Hence the dumbing down of the west and the smartening up the east (worldwide). We dumb, but we got loads of equipment!

 

[mgranato]

I'm of the opinion that the most advanced equpiment takes an advanced operator...

 

[Dariusz J.]

Dariusz,

Saying that force plates are useless and that you can "see" it on video is just like the folks that think they can "see" things without 3D, and "see" angle of attack without radar.

NO CHANCE.

You misunderstood me completely, Brian. I said force plates are useless ALONE because they will show ONLY pressure changes without seing anatomical origin of the actions.
Until there are measuring devices capable to measure torques in the joints, we have no other chioice but to observe and speculate.

Cheers

 

[wulsy]

Valid point mgran.

BUT,

F1 cars are bad ass cars, it's much easier to drive a top of the range BMW. Therefore BMWs are not what future F1 drivers learn in - they learn in go-karts.

MRI scanners never cured anyone, they just tell you you're sick (which you already knew).

Launch monitors tell you some basic info which is only of any use to a highly skilled fitter/teacher who could probably do his job to 90% without one.

Not against technology, just sayin don't get carried away by it...

 

[art]

Valid point mgran.

BUT,

F1 cars are bad ass cars, it's much easier to drive a top of the range BMW. Therefore BMWs are not what future F1 drivers learn in - they learn in go-karts.

MRI scanners never cured anyone, they just tell you you're sick (which you already knew).

Launch monitors tell you some basic info which is only of any use to a highly skilled fitter/teacher who could probably do his job to 90% without one.

Not against technology, just sayin don't get carried away by it...

Dear wulsy,

IMO most instructors of ANY subject are, initially, like 'specialized' researchers 'reduce' the problem by measuring the activity/characteristics of the parts, ie, 'reductionism'. This is absolutely necessary AS A START, however, as you can see from the quote below, much more understanding and therefor progress/ improvement potential exists in ALSO treating the desired element as part of a larger system.

"Reductionism vs Systems Thinking"
According to Kirby and Rosenhead (2005), "the fact that these systems were experiencing profound change could be attributed to the end of the "Machine Age" and the onset of the "Systems Age". The Machine Age, bequeathed by the Industrial Revolution, was underpinned by two concepts – reductionism (everything can in the end be decomposed into indivisible parts) and mechanism (cause-effect relationships)".[2] Hereby "all phenomena were believed to be explained by using only one ultimately simple relationship, cause-effect", which in the Systems Age are replaced by expansionism and teleology with producer-product replacing cause-effect. "Expansionism is a doctrine maintaining that all objects and events, and all experiences of them, are parts of larger wholes."[8] According to Ackoff, "the beginning of the end of the Machine Age and the beginning of the Systems Age could be dated to the 1940s, a decade when philosophers, mathematicians, and biologists, building on developments in the interwar period, defined a new intellectual framework".[2]

I have been a strong proponent of INTEGRATING AND SYNCHRONIZING the output of all the sensors, force plates, LM's, 3D 6DOF, etc. you have spoken of , but do not refer to this as getting carried away with technology, but trying with all my might to make you and others aware of the rewards that await this integrated understanding.

I do not see how, with over a million degrees of freedom considering all the body elements involved in the golf swing, any significant improvement can be obtained, or best, 'maximized' without an in depth 'systems' understanding.

Respectfully,
art

 

[wulsy]

Dear art,

Thanks for sharing your ideas - what you say strikes a chord with my thoughts.

Very interesting analogy with the Machine Age vs the Systems Age - it seems to me we are involved in "golf reductionism by technology" and that our Systems Age has yet to come. Maybe you're the guy to speed it along!

Best wishes, wulsy

 

[Frans@France]

Launch monitors tell you some basic info which is only of any use to a highly skilled fitter... who could probably do his job to 90% without one.

I'm sorry but I have to disagree....but then again maybe I'm not a highly skilled fitter

 

[wulsy]

Sorry, the 90% thing was more related to teachers. I'm sure LMs are pretty much essential for fitting.

 

[mgranato]

Valid point mgran.

BUT,

F1 cars are bad ass cars, it's much easier to drive a top of the range BMW. Therefore BMWs are not what future F1 drivers learn in - they learn in go-karts.

MRI scanners never cured anyone, they just tell you you're sick (which you already knew).

Launch monitors tell you some basic info which is only of any use to a highly skilled fitter/teacher who could probably do his job to 90% without one.

Not against technology, just sayin don't get carried away by it...

The top range BMW (and the like) get their performance, safety, and other features passed down through what is learned from the cutting edge of automotive engineering - Formula 1. It's largely because of this "trickle down bad ass" that the cars on the road are what they are.

MRIs weren't created to cure, rather to accurately diagnose so the correct cure could be applied without needless guessing. Sound familiar?

LMs, 3D, Enso, etc. aren't golfing cures. They are today's best technology tools for today's best teachers/researchers/fitters. They are not for the end user because of the monetary and educational investment. Just like F1 cars and MRI machines, these things are built for the professional with the understanding that the things learned will benefit a much, much wider audience. R&D is beneficial to every product, and eventually, every consumer.

 

[magicmarker]

Dariusz. I know I'm nearing your holy ground with this and I'm not going to engage in a future threadjack with you on this moving forward. I will just say this. Some of Hogan's secrets were specifically designed to help Ben Hogan navigate through a golf course, not necessarily everyone. This is probably why he said the secret is 'in the dirt'. Because he knew what worked for him would NOT work FOR EVERYONE. So get to work and figure it out for yourself was more in line with his motto... Hogan was the best player in his time, not the best teacher. To imply that everything he did was exactly how everyone should do it is laughable, and Hogan himself would probably laugh the hardest at such assertions. If what he did was so simple and automated from an anatomical perspective, why in God's name did he have to work so much harder than everyone else to solidify his own pattern?

I really do admire Hogan as much as you do... well maybe not that much... but pretty close to it. Only I look at him as the model for hard work and determination, NOT for his golf swing. We both see greatness, I just see a completely different reason for what made him so...

 

[spktho]

There is another way to apply torque to the ground with the feet other than with clockwise or counter-clockwise torques. Though, granted while swinging these torques may end up as clockwise/counter-clockwise.

 

[Dariusz J.]

Dariusz. I know I'm nearing your holy ground with this and I'm not going to engage in a future threadjack with you on this moving forward. I will just say this. Some of Hogan's secrets were specifically designed to help Ben Hogan navigate through a golf course, not necessarily everyone. This is probably why he said the secret is 'in the dirt'. Because he knew what worked for him would NOT work FOR EVERYONE. So get to work and figure it out for yourself was more in line with his motto... Hogan was the best player in his time, not the best teacher. To imply that everything he did was exactly how everyone should do it is laughable, and Hogan himself would probably laugh the hardest at such assertions. If what he did was so simple and automated from an anatomical perspective, why in God's name did he have to work so much harder than everyone else to solidify his own pattern?

I really do admire Hogan as much as you do... well maybe not that much... but pretty close to it. Only I look at him as the model for hard work and determination, NOT for his golf swing. We both see greatness, I just see a completely different reason for what made him so...

I cannot understand your post now. Have you read the entire thread ? I had no intentions to impose Hogan to this thread but I have just responded to one of the thread participant's question "Can one pre-set the counter clockwise shearing force against the ground? I don't think I'm coordinated enough to take the club away and "shear" at the same time".
It happens that I know very well how to do it, partially through observing Hogan's setup, thus, I wanted to share my knowledge to help someone. Hogan's example is the best because it is well documented and pretty well visible what he was doing. I could bring vid of myself where the preset procedure is even more visible but I believed that Hogan's name validates the concept better than anything. What a threadjack is it then ?

Moreover, your assertion about implying everything what Hogan did is very odd. I do not try to convince anyone to do more than describing my knowledge how to preset one's joints to benefit from it in later on in the motion is very important and I claim that many people can benefit from it while implementing it to their own motions. I claim that Hogan did it as well.

Lastly, you made a vicious comment under my post, that I treated seriously and responded to as well as I could plus even wasted my time (as I see now) to copy and bring to the forum the whole explanation, that, if you were truly interested in the answer instead ridiculing me and my post in an usual manner from yesteryear on this forum, you would find easily under the vid on the YT site.

Something never changes here as I can see.

Cheers

 

[jimmyt]

I cannot understand your post now. Have you read the entire thread ? I had no intentions to impose Hogan to this thread but I have just responded to one of the thread participant's question "Can one pre-set the counter clockwise shearing force against the ground? I don't think I'm coordinated enough to take the club away and "shear" at the same time".
It happens that I know very well how to do it, partially through observing Hogan's setup, thus, I wanted to share my knowledge to help someone. Hogan's example is the best because it is well documented and pretty well visible what he was doing. I could bring vid of myself where the preset procedure is even more visible but I believed that Hogan's name validates the concept better than anything. What a threadjack is it then ?

Moreover, your assertion about implying everything what Hogan did is very odd. I do not try to convince anyone to do more than describing my knowledge how to preset one's joints to benefit from it in later on in the motion is very important and I claim that many people can benefit from it while implementing it to their own motions. I claim that Hogan did it as well.

Lastly, you made a vicious comment under my post, that I treated seriously and responded to as well as I could plus even wasted my time (as I see now) to copy and bring to the forum the whole explanation, that, if you were truly interested in the answer instead ridiculing me and my post in an usual manner from yesteryear on this forum, you would find easily under the vid on the YT site.

Something never changes here as I can see.

Cheers

There most be a translation problem or something else is going on between the 2 of you. His post seemed to be respectful & complementary.

What did I miss????????

 

[Dariusz J.]

There most be a translation problem or something else is going on between the 2 of you. His post seemed to be respectful & complementary.

What did I miss????????

Have you read the entire exchange of posts between Magicmarker and myself in the thread ? Or only his last post on this page ? There were no problems between us and I am also surprised with his posts. Instead hearing "thank you for your answer" I received another story of being not only completely useless but also suggestions that I am crazy on Hogan as it was happening often some months ago here.

Cheers

 

[jimmyt]

Have you read the entire exchange of posts between Magicmarker and myself in the thread ? Or only his last post on this page ? There were no problems between us and I am also surprised with his posts. Instead hearing "thank you for your answer" I received another story of being not only completely useless but also suggestions that I am crazy on Hogan as it was happening often some months ago here.

Cheers

Sorry I did miss that exchange.
I stand corrected.

 

[magicmarker]

You posted a video claiming it was obvious if you know where to look.

I didn't know where to look. When you link a video into your post I watch it here, I do not track it back to youtube and read all the comments, my apologies. I will not be changing that habit, my apologies again.

I am sorry if my latter post offended you but I honestly thought we would find more common ground when I wrote it. Still do, hopefully not hopelessly. My post stands. Carry on.

 

[Dariusz J.]

You posted a video claiming it was obvious if you know where to look.

I didn't know where to look. When you link a video into your post I watch it here, I do not track it back to youtube and read all the comments, my apologies. I will not be changing that habit, my apologies again.

That's why I copied everything to you and laid it up in front of your nose. Perhaps you did not see it.

I am sorry if my latter post offended you but I honestly thought we would find more common ground when I wrote it. Still do, hopefully not hopelessly. My post stands. Carry on.

No probs. Apologies accepted without any hesitation, the more you're one of the nicest and wisest guys on this forum.

Cheers