A) This thread has it's greatest relevance for those that came through the "Ben Doyle Bloodline"
B) It has particular relevance to certain Golfing Machine applications, mis-interpretations, etc.
C) It has the potential to help others learn and grow in their effort to teach and/or play
A) This thread has it's greatest relevance for those that came through the "Ben Doyle Bloodline"
B) It has particular relevance to certain Golfing Machine applications, mis-interpretations, etc.
C) It has the potential to help others learn and grow in their effort to teach and/or play
Here is a subtle but important difference.
And, more or less, the point of this whole thread:
Took a little closer look today at this and I think the yellow dot on my hands at impact is placed too low. Compare where the the Callaway logo is on the back of my glove in the two pics: it goes up just about as much as Rory's logo, maybe more. I wuz robbed!
Maybe wrong, but I agree it could have been a smidge higher but Rory imo got much higher in that transition. I know it may not matter to your personal satisfaction, but Brian said he had tons of backup on this kind of thing (better, clearer, more precise photos and analysis etc) - that this was just "representative" - at least semi.
Maybe wrong, but I agree it could have been a smidge higher but Rory imo got much higher in that transition.
Nonsense. Rory's yellow dot is just in line with the bottom of the logo on the back of his glove; put a dot on my glove in the same place and it raises the same amount, maybe more. I AIN'T NO HANDLE DRAGGER!!!
I think there is a reason the guys are monitoring the coupling point and not the logo on the glove . . . you have rotation around the coupling point and the logo goes up, but the couple point might still have traveled level or down (or up).
All this talk of "only normal force at impact" reminded me of this:
Mike Austin's FLAMMER - YouTube
Think he was onto something?
ok buds, the thread is getting a bit boring.
Your right, ask for a ruling, throw a flag or something, you have been ripped off...lol. Where's the ref?
A smidge? It's a whole dot out, give the man his due. Hanging chad ring a bell.
I think there is a reason the guys are monitoring the coupling point and not the logo on the glove . . . you have rotation around the coupling point and the logo goes up, but the couple point might still have traveled level or down (or up).
Nope.
Wrong again.
The dots on Jeffy and Rory are PERFECT down to the pixel.
COUPLING POINT....not logo.
Thank goodness.
I hope you and MJ realise that you guys still possess the ability to "be wrong". If you can't be wrong you can't be anything. Additionally I doubt if you guys really know it all. To talk like you know it all and everyone else know f all is just poor form. Think back five years to your convictions about certain aspects that you now know to be "wrong" and think forward to five years from now. Do you think you'll be saying exactly the same things?
That the CP moves up is beyond dispute, but repeating it ad nauseum doesn't make it any more right. IMO saying the same thing over and over again to a captive audience becomes boring after a while.
I made a valid point in my post about the bending of the left wrist which you ignored only to respond with an abrasive "wrong again" comment about my tongue in cheek comment about the thread becoming boring because of the repetition of the same point over and over again, especially in relation to jeffy's swing. Who gives a sh*t about jeffy's swing apart from jeffy?
My point about the bending of the left wrist is valid whether you realised it or not, because it relates very specifically to the concept of analytical dynamics/kinetics in the golf swing: the very area with which you have concerned yourself, and as a consequence realised that some of you previous assumptions/beliefs were wrong. Not everyone on here is clueless, and not everyone who doesn't sychophantishly agree with you is "wrong". A little humility is never a bad thing.