Michael Finney
New
Max Prokopy said:
Wow - I seriously doubt Jeff would even claim me as any expert! I've only been in touch with him for 7 days...and already this. Oh well. I was in touch with Kelvin 2 years ago but realized I needed to learn more about his approach before even considering I could properly evaluate it.
I guess Mr. Finney does not know the meaning of the term biomechanics: it is simply the study of movement, and in our case in vivo with humans. One can accomplish that with a host of methods. He has confused precision with accuracy or validity...a shame.
My observations are clearly not qualitative. That was whole point of sending the graph(s) to Kelvin!
OK, I am certain he does claim you as an expert. If Kelvin does - he will. I listed several of the people who Jeffy claims as experts - none of them have degrees in biomechanics. I listed 5 or 6 people who we claim to be experts - they all have PhDs in biomechanics. It's there for anyone to review and decide for themselves. Jeffy has yet to address this because he has no defense other than "maybe they have a fresh approach by coming from outside the real world of biomechanics"….but we all know that argument would fall flat.
And then you say that you used the last two years looking at Kelvins approach to analyzing human movement. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Kelvin's approach is PURELY LINE DRAWING and is subject to the many hazards that 2D offers the deconstruction of human movement. Now, you can say he has the right to this approach and that he can do good things with this approach. THEN, I can say that the approach is riddled with "seems as if" and can be counter productive when in the hands of a person driving a certain agenda without access to accurate 3D data. Please reference, hip deceleration, closed to open faces, and spinal engine contributions to rotational velocity of the pelvis and torso.
The graphs you sent to Kelvin have been looked at by two of our friends in the biomechanics business - they have some issues with the comments you made about the data as well as the comments made by Jeff Martin. I will leave that for you guys to work through if you would like.
I will get back to a major point that I made with Atanu Muhjerkee and his criticisms of modern day biomechanics models. If you are going to criticize the approach of Neal, Mackenzie, Cheetham, Duffey, and Kwon, please offer a better actionable alternative. Please don't criticize the models while heaping praise on what Kelvin and Jeff do - draw lines on casio video and make conclusions that begin with he phrase IT STANDS TO REASON.
Wow - I seriously doubt Jeff would even claim me as any expert! I've only been in touch with him for 7 days...and already this. Oh well. I was in touch with Kelvin 2 years ago but realized I needed to learn more about his approach before even considering I could properly evaluate it.
I guess Mr. Finney does not know the meaning of the term biomechanics: it is simply the study of movement, and in our case in vivo with humans. One can accomplish that with a host of methods. He has confused precision with accuracy or validity...a shame.
My observations are clearly not qualitative. That was whole point of sending the graph(s) to Kelvin!
OK, I am certain he does claim you as an expert. If Kelvin does - he will. I listed several of the people who Jeffy claims as experts - none of them have degrees in biomechanics. I listed 5 or 6 people who we claim to be experts - they all have PhDs in biomechanics. It's there for anyone to review and decide for themselves. Jeffy has yet to address this because he has no defense other than "maybe they have a fresh approach by coming from outside the real world of biomechanics"….but we all know that argument would fall flat.
And then you say that you used the last two years looking at Kelvins approach to analyzing human movement. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Kelvin's approach is PURELY LINE DRAWING and is subject to the many hazards that 2D offers the deconstruction of human movement. Now, you can say he has the right to this approach and that he can do good things with this approach. THEN, I can say that the approach is riddled with "seems as if" and can be counter productive when in the hands of a person driving a certain agenda without access to accurate 3D data. Please reference, hip deceleration, closed to open faces, and spinal engine contributions to rotational velocity of the pelvis and torso.
The graphs you sent to Kelvin have been looked at by two of our friends in the biomechanics business - they have some issues with the comments you made about the data as well as the comments made by Jeff Martin. I will leave that for you guys to work through if you would like.
I will get back to a major point that I made with Atanu Muhjerkee and his criticisms of modern day biomechanics models. If you are going to criticize the approach of Neal, Mackenzie, Cheetham, Duffey, and Kwon, please offer a better actionable alternative. Please don't criticize the models while heaping praise on what Kelvin and Jeff do - draw lines on casio video and make conclusions that begin with he phrase IT STANDS TO REASON.