there's a picture out there that is being touted....

[Michael Finney]

as the most important illustration in the history of golf........at least they were nice enough to put a question mark at the end - very humble, indeed

one of the visual basics of this picture is a "lagging clubhead" with a correspondingly wildly bent shaft....

this is a picture of Byron Nelson is shown that indeed shows that the club can be in a lagging position just before impact....

i'm assuming they aren't showing a fat shot

i'm assuming they aren't thinking that Byron Nelson's picture is not a product of camera lens distortion

i'm assuming they think that someone can actually get into that position

sasho mackenzie says they're wrong:

"The final phase of shaft deflection was the most
important since it explained clubhead orientation at impact.
Over the final few hundredths of a second of the downswing,
the clubhead rapidly moved from its maximum
lagging position into its maximum leading position at
impact. The lead deflections at impact for the normal
optimized simulation were approximately 6.25 cm in
magnitude. The complete removal of radial force during
the downswing only reduced lead deflection to 4.72 cm
(Fig. 8; Table 1). Therefore, when acting in isolation, the
tangential forces that occur during the late phase (after
0.15 s) of the downswing were a major contributor to the
lead deflection at impact. The complete isolation of radial
force demonstrated that, while acting alone, radial force
only resulted in 1.22 cm of lead deflection at impact
(Fig. 9; Table 1)."

here's the full paper:

UofS Theses: Understanding the role of shaft stiffness in the golf swing

 

[Michael Finney]

i will beat everyone to the punch....

"it's a feeeeeeel"

feel through other feels - if they would just admit it

 

[dbl]

Not sure about that picture, but surely not "real" evidence.

Shaftlab showed
[media]http://www.tutelman.com/golf/shafts/ShaftLab/bend-Jacobsen.gif[/media]

Just before impact, the head is leading...



From Tutleman's page on shaftlab
Lessons from ShaftLab

 

[bax1865]

Kev
That paper was almost as long as the Health Care Reform Bill!!! All they needed was a Casio camera to see that the shaft bends the opposite way everyone aways thought it did. At least it did to me.....Great stuff, when I get some time I will try to read more of the paper....but may need to wait for the movie to come out!!! Thanks for making that available to all of us.

 

[Jared Willerson]

Do these people not own a casio? Or look at every swing sequence in Golf Digest over the last several years?

In EVERY instance the shaft is bending the opposite direction. Talk about holding on to the past....when you have to use photos from the 30's, 40's & 50's and it's subsequent low grade technology, fim quality and frame and shutter speed limitations to find some tiny shred of evidence that supports what you feel, then claim it as what should happen in a golf swing....oh my.

 

[savydan]

"My benchmark of "important" demands that the illustration also be correct."

 

[spmurph]

Kev
That paper was almost as long as the Health Care Reform Bill!!! All they needed was a Casio camera to see that the shaft bends the opposite way everyone aways thought it did. At least it did to me.....Great stuff, when I get some time I will try to read more of the paper....but may need to wait for the movie to come out!!! Thanks for making that available to all of us.

There is an abriged version on his website. I would post the link but I don't want to violate rules.

 

[Ringer]

Huh... I thought it was this picture.

 

[natep]

"My benchmark of "important" demands that the illustration also be correct."

lol

 

[chipingguru]

I saw Mr. Byron play nine holes with Tom Watson at Augusta once during a practice round.

He was old but man he could still hit it on a string. It was awesome to see.

 

[spktho]

Does he think that is really how a shaft looks into impact? Wow.

 

[Jared Willerson]

I want to publicly apologize to Brian. In the past, while I have always supported him, I thought he may be prone to a bit of hyperbole when it came to the literalist crowd. Now I know better after viewing that garbage that Brian was not only right but also correct in pointing how closed minded and irrational the literalists really are.

 

[Jay845]

as the most important illustration in the history of golf........at least they were nice enough to put a question mark at the end - very humble, indeed

one of the visual basics of this picture is a "lagging clubhead" with a correspondingly wildly bent shaft....

this is a picture of Byron Nelson is shown that indeed shows that the club can be in a lagging position just before impact....

i'm assuming they aren't showing a fat shot

i'm assuming they aren't thinking that Byron Nelson's picture is not a product of camera lens distortion

i'm assuming they think that someone can actually get into that position

sasho mackenzie says they're wrong:

"The final phase of shaft deflection was the most
important since it explained clubhead orientation at impact.
Over the final few hundredths of a second of the downswing,
the clubhead rapidly moved from its maximum
lagging position into its maximum leading position at
impact. The lead deflections at impact for the normal
optimized simulation were approximately 6.25 cm in
magnitude. The complete removal of radial force during
the downswing only reduced lead deflection to 4.72 cm
(Fig. 8; Table 1). Therefore, when acting in isolation, the
tangential forces that occur during the late phase (after
0.15 s) of the downswing were a major contributor to the
lead deflection at impact. The complete isolation of radial
force demonstrated that, while acting alone, radial force
only resulted in 1.22 cm of lead deflection at impact
(Fig. 9; Table 1)."

here's the full paper:

UofS Theses: Understanding the role of shaft stiffness in the golf swing

I find it pretty neat that a guy who studied at my hometown University is being referenced in this forum. Not bad for a small city in the Great White North.

 

[Brian Manzella]

 

[natep]

[media]http://home.btconnect.com/edenpalms-floridavilla/images/Mickey-Magic-Rain-Believe-Magic.gif[/media]

 

[chipingguru]

Earth must have slipped off its axis for a brief moment. Messed up poor Byron's aiming point.

 

[golfdad]

so how did this frame of pic come about?

i am asking from a neutral point of view...clearly mr finney is presenting this with some level of ridicule if i did not misread it.

it sounds like based on the knowledge available now, that frame of pic is not physically correct or possible.

so, how did that frame of pic come into existence?

since the quoted paper discusses the role of shaft stiffness, do we have reliable information on the shaft stiffness in the frame of pic in question?

would you think that another factor in play, while evaluating deflection in the context of shaft stiffness, is the swing speed? is that info available as reference?

for instance, lets take a modern person using a modern club with a modern whatever shaft and go from there...

if he swings at close 100 mph vs if he swings at close to 0 mph, i would think the shaft deflections during those 2 swings will exhibit different characteristics?

okay,,,how about at 10, 20, 30,,,,90 mph?

shall we guess or shall we ask the scientists to do some more experiment?

perhaps the answers will tie in this infamous frame of pic???

 

[Phil Rosenbaum]

So, if the player could make the shaft do that, and in this case it seems as though he can, where would that ball go?

If the clubhead was that far behind, I would play him for anything......if the shaft did what we know it does, I need some shots.

 

[ScottRob]

What can we trust?

So, any appearance of shaft bend attributed to lag pressure is a photographic distortion? Obviously, Byron Nelson was a stud. So, what is the commonality of this "look" in great ball strikers? Or is it such a distortion that it cannot tell us a blessed thing? I have noticed that you see the opposite look from modern day pros with the high speed gizmos we have these days. Thought it might be because they are crappy ball strikers compared to the players of yester year! Is the face I see the mirror really me?

I have to say that I used to think that Brian was too strident in his pronouncements. Yet he is the only instructor (along with his posse) that is capable of adapting his thinking to better information, making him a rare animal...an open-minded teaching professional! I apologize to the other open-minded instructors that are victims to my generalization. Why does it seem that European professionals are more in the know on this stuff? Is it an ivory tower thing?

 

[Rick Dandy]

Is it about time in relation to the photography equipment used?