Dariusz: Who is Tee? Why should we listen to him?
The Release w/Brian Manzella & Michael Jacobs
- Thread starter dschultz6072
- Start date
- Status
Dariusz: Who is Tee? Why should we listen to him?
Dariusz J.
New member
IIRC from my WRX days (and judging from the diagrammes he presented there and here now that I sort of remember), he is a good guy from Finland (and, thus, prolly sleeping already LOL) who is in a possession of a kinematic measuring system that enables drawing conclusions from them as from the 3D motion in reality. I remembered him, since a lot of his diagramme presentations were exactly in line with my theoretic studies as regards the swing motion and against the current golf instruction. Should interest quite a bit of guys here, I guess with his stuff.
Cheers
See this graph which has been around for awhle (from Tutelman's site re Shaftlab):
From the other info on the page at Tutleman's that is an inch of deflection - So ss is behind
ETA: I see there are 3 pages more of additional input, with more modern measurements. Hopefully it all agreess, if not when i catch up I will edit.
Last edited:
Ok what in your opinon would be the right things to do that create lag so no one would have to worry about it?
Ok will do,thank you very much.
Jeffy,
Thanks for the clear response/definition - now I understand what you were looking at. Certainly very visible with Lee Westwood.
Thanks, I see where the confusion lies for me - I personally don't think Maltby was very clear. The lie angle of a golf club is usually measured by the angle the golf shaft is coming out of the clubhead when the clubhead sole is "flat" on the ground. So any shaft droop near the clubhead during the swing would effectively increase the lie angle i.e. make the shaft more steep.
Now, if you have a clubhead soled on the ground with the toe in the air and you increase/steepen the shaft angle you make the sole of the clubhead flatter or more parallel to the ground. Normally when one would say "make the lie of the club flatter" they would be referring to the lie angle of the shaft, however to make Maltby's quote correct - it would need to be referring to the sole of the clubhead flatter assuming the toe was in the air before hand and the increased/steeper shaft angle flattened the sole of the clubhead - i.e. made the sole more parallel to the ground . Because if the sole was flat to begin with and the shaft droop created more toe down/heel up then the sole of the clubhead would move more away from flat - not become flatter. Just poor verbiage on his part which drives me crazy with it's lack of precision.
Last edited:
Lag
Unless you really know what you are doing - there are alot of ideas, concepts and discussions in this thread that could really get a player working on the wrong things - buyer beware. Now, the good thing about this thread is it's creating a situation where definitions not only need to be clear but also redefined. For example, a lot of people are going to interpret creating lag or not creating lag in a number of different ways- all leading to different end results. For example there is a geometrical lag - i.e. clubhead trailing hands at certain points in the swing. Then you have lag as a concept in sensing inertia as you accelerate an object. You may sense that inertia in pulling on an object or pushing on an object. Then you have issues regarding where you might sense this inertia on your body and at what periods or points in your golf movment you would experience it. Then you have issues in regards to perception and intention- where even if things exist it doesn't mean that you are aware of them or focus on them. It's not my role here to break out all of those concepts into detail - but you'll only be as good in the implementation of these ideas on this thread and in your golf movement - based on the clarity of your definitions and understanding of these concepts.
So it's like Maltby's "the lie gets flatter with shaft droop", different people will get different ideas depending on what enters their head for the answer to the "Lie of what?" The sole of the club? The angle of the shaft? Same thing with lag - what exactly are you referring to - a shaft bowing to the target?, a bent right wrist?, a clubhead trailing the hands?, a clubshaft angled 90 degrees to the left arm?, sensing inertia of the golf club with the hands?, sensing limbs accelerated by the pivot?, and what portion or periods of the golf movement are you referencing for whatever one of these items that you are referring to? And on and on and .......
To me what I see happening here - is some really good concepts surrounded by confusion, which eventually will be worked through, defined, and differentiated in a much more precise way. For example taking lag as one example: lag or your perception of lag isn't a fairy tale - it's real - the questions are What is it? Do you want to create it?, Do you focus on it?, if so when? where?, how?, etc. etc.
Unless you really know what you are doing - there are alot of ideas, concepts and discussions in this thread that could really get a player working on the wrong things - buyer beware. Now, the good thing about this thread is it's creating a situation where definitions not only need to be clear but also redefined. For example, a lot of people are going to interpret creating lag or not creating lag in a number of different ways- all leading to different end results. For example there is a geometrical lag - i.e. clubhead trailing hands at certain points in the swing. Then you have lag as a concept in sensing inertia as you accelerate an object. You may sense that inertia in pulling on an object or pushing on an object. Then you have issues regarding where you might sense this inertia on your body and at what periods or points in your golf movment you would experience it. Then you have issues in regards to perception and intention- where even if things exist it doesn't mean that you are aware of them or focus on them. It's not my role here to break out all of those concepts into detail - but you'll only be as good in the implementation of these ideas on this thread and in your golf movement - based on the clarity of your definitions and understanding of these concepts.
So it's like Maltby's "the lie gets flatter with shaft droop", different people will get different ideas depending on what enters their head for the answer to the "Lie of what?" The sole of the club? The angle of the shaft? Same thing with lag - what exactly are you referring to - a shaft bowing to the target?, a bent right wrist?, a clubhead trailing the hands?, a clubshaft angled 90 degrees to the left arm?, sensing inertia of the golf club with the hands?, sensing limbs accelerated by the pivot?, and what portion or periods of the golf movement are you referencing for whatever one of these items that you are referring to? And on and on and .......
To me what I see happening here - is some really good concepts surrounded by confusion, which eventually will be worked through, defined, and differentiated in a much more precise way. For example taking lag as one example: lag or your perception of lag isn't a fairy tale - it's real - the questions are What is it? Do you want to create it?, Do you focus on it?, if so when? where?, how?, etc. etc.
Last edited:
Second image is from bird eye view and we can see relative to the rotation, it passes the hands much much later.
There is different type of players, but we have to remember all the time that we have to know more about that move than can easily be seen. In this case the player takes his hands so much to the left, that it seems there is no forward lean, even when the ch stays much behind the hands through impact.
So when talking about ch passing the hands, we should be really carefully with definitions which way we mean it. Specially when we connect that to the learning process and what player should do.
.
Tee: was this a good shot? How did the ball fly?
It flew 4,2 meters.. yep we were indoors
The player said it was perfect and players of that level knows it quite well. But it's not question of one shot. If I take all his shots, they are about the same. There can be small differences in timing or some lines, but big things never really change. The cross point is about there.
Ive never thought that graph like that.
So to really understand what that graph is telling, just draw the target line to the ground. After that draw another line perpendicular to the target line so the ball position is on that line. Now still looking everything top down view, the zero point is where everything is on that second line. That means zero rotation either way and the center of rotation is somewhere middle of torso and it's vertical axis. So when the shaft is parallel to the target line and in center of the torso, it means 90 degrees rotation.
I found it once again hard to explain and I'm often too familiar with these graphs and it's great people ask definitions. We use them mainly to compare players and have lots of them where we have learned something that good players numbers are and what not. It makes good to really need to explain how they are measured.
So in Your question You're quite right but have to understand also the point when it happens. At the cross point shoulders are turned already about 90 degrees and belt buckle is facing to the target. So hands can't really continue much more around and they start to rise. Also the head is passing the hands at that direction, because there is no way to resist any more. It's same than it rises at follow through, even we do nothing to lift it.
The main difference is to those players who has strong cross over release or who stop their pivot like this player
At 2D to target the crossing point is quite same, so from face on view ch passes the hands about at same moment
But they got huge difference when viewed relative to that rotation
Crossover point (approx.)?
About yes. Cant see the ch, but this is quite near. Line from the navel continuing through the hands and bird eye view. I think he has it little bit too early.
And still to remember that there is many things effecting that point. More palmar flexion and ulnar deviation will also move it later.
Palmar FLEXION (ie LESS cupping)of the LEFT hand? That would shut the face and would not be very compatible with pronation through impact, right? (PS I know that the medical establishment states that flexion and extension are often mixed up by non-medical people, so maybe you mean the opposite to what I just stated).
By the way Tee, do you have a graphs of the hand/ch realtionship from the bird's eye view relative to the target line alone?
Thanks again for your responses.
By the way Tee, do you have a graphs of the hand/ch realtionship from the bird's eye view relative to the target line alone?
Thanks again for your responses.
Palmar flexion is bowing and it's opposite to dorsal flexion. Pronating is rotation of the forearm, not bending the wrist like Hogan figured. Iw the hand is foot, then his terms match, but it's not. So supination is rotating the forearm outwards and pronation inwards. Without any other moves supination rotates face close and pronation opens it. PF is also closing the face a bit but not rotating the shaft. It's more forward leaning term.
And we got measurement called "path" It's always the distance from the target line at the objects height. Red is hands and blue one is club head and when it's at black line, it's on the target line. When its upside of that, it's inside of the target line.
Start to be little hurry here, but I can make zoomed image of that tomorrow.
I hope I don't mess too much with these graphs here. Brian, just PM me if I do.
edit: one more for the road from our 3D-scene from top down
Green is hands and blue is ch. Static line is btw and dotted is dsw.
Last edited:
- Status