lia41985
New member
Are you sure, Nate? The Y axis on the latest graph (which looks like an AMM graph) is labeled F.
What Kind of Release is this? & Can an effective swing include no deceleration?
- Thread starter Brian Manzella
- Start date
- Status
Brian Manzella
Administrator
The MAT-T system info can be displayed in a graph as well.
natep
New
If you look at the color code thing at the bottom, it's labelled 'Pelvic Rotational Velocity", etc.
lia41985
New member
That's true but those smaller numbers don't seem to correspond directly to the Y-axis, which is labeled in units to the thousands and is labeled as F.
From my work I've been made acutely aware not to present data without context and that doing so excessively is called data dumping (presenting information without explanation).
Yes, we know that according to kinetic chain theory there is a sort of ramped sequencing occurring.
The torso measurements from the MATT system are confounding.
The latest graph, using a different modality, seems to be measuring something different.
We're talking about acceleration in regards to data that is actually measuring velocity.
Let's just take our time and get this as right as we can.
natep
New
There's definitely difference in the numbers between the two machines....and at least on that last MATT video, the peak torso speed happens after impact, while peak happens before impact on the graph. Could just be different swings, but did you post earlier that all of the MATT numbers showed peak torso velocity post impact?
Kevin Shields
Super Moderator
I'm thinking Justin Roseish
Brian Manzella
Administrator
The swings with the avatar are from the MotionReality 3D system. Degrees per second of the velocities. The graph is a 12 sensor AMM machine displaying velocities on a graph, the way most 3D experts and teacher prefer.
What we are showing whoever is interested is how golfers basically use their pivot to assist their arms, hands, and wrists in delivering the club with speed and precision.
Of course, there is no "forces and torques" info in these readouts. That type of stuff is mathematically derived by a scientist like Steven Nesbit or Shaso MacKenzie. One day, they'll be a machine that displays this sort of data.
In my 30 years of teaching, I have taught both the idea that the golfer has a reduction in the velocity of the hips, torso, and arms pre-impact, and that they don't decelerate. Lucky for the golfers I taught to do the latter, they still managed through athletic ability to do the opposite. Or a least some of the former.
Since everything is rotating, everyone "looking at it" with a 2D video view, is missing the fact the an ant on a record album could just go along for the ride, walk in the direction of the rotating platter, or walk "backward" and would still look to be moving forward.
In my view, it is the application of the correct forces and torques through the ball that cause the decelerations.
The fact that you should be in negative alpha. negative beta, and positive gamma through impact, can only be really performed correctly with a BIG assist from the arms, torso, and pelvis.
Mike Jacobs can tell you of golfers trying to "have the club up their left way past impact" with very NON-tour like velocities measured on 3D, who SUDDENLY, in the course of a swing or two, having much better velocities just by applying the correct idea to the left and right wrist movements.
Of course the force plates have a large say in how all of this is happening, but that is for another day.
Thanks,
Bmanz
What we are showing whoever is interested is how golfers basically use their pivot to assist their arms, hands, and wrists in delivering the club with speed and precision.
Of course, there is no "forces and torques" info in these readouts. That type of stuff is mathematically derived by a scientist like Steven Nesbit or Shaso MacKenzie. One day, they'll be a machine that displays this sort of data.
In my 30 years of teaching, I have taught both the idea that the golfer has a reduction in the velocity of the hips, torso, and arms pre-impact, and that they don't decelerate. Lucky for the golfers I taught to do the latter, they still managed through athletic ability to do the opposite. Or a least some of the former.
Since everything is rotating, everyone "looking at it" with a 2D video view, is missing the fact the an ant on a record album could just go along for the ride, walk in the direction of the rotating platter, or walk "backward" and would still look to be moving forward.
In my view, it is the application of the correct forces and torques through the ball that cause the decelerations.
The fact that you should be in negative alpha. negative beta, and positive gamma through impact, can only be really performed correctly with a BIG assist from the arms, torso, and pelvis.
Mike Jacobs can tell you of golfers trying to "have the club up their left way past impact" with very NON-tour like velocities measured on 3D, who SUDDENLY, in the course of a swing or two, having much better velocities just by applying the correct idea to the left and right wrist movements.
Of course the force plates have a large say in how all of this is happening, but that is for another day.
Thanks,
Bmanz
Matt Bryda
New
All the force/torque has to have something to push back against
Ground..Body
natep
New
This makes a lot of sense.
I believe someone said sometime ago that using a club like a club was a good idea. Now who was that again?
But anyone who thinks this data is totally accurate or all encompassing is very naive. These machines and the whole measuring process in in its infancy and as such will have teething problems which will compromise the accuracy of the data. This together with knowing exactly what to measure and how to measure it optimally is a problem for the scientists, hence the response from "Ian" to MF, which to my mind was a little embarrassing. You can't measure something and then say it is inaccurate because it doesn't fit the theory you prefer. That's unscientific, right?
The question is: is it accurate enough to represent the basic truths about the golf swing and blow up any silly theories offered by others? Probably is, IMHO.
But anyone who thinks this data is totally accurate or all encompassing is very naive. These machines and the whole measuring process in in its infancy and as such will have teething problems which will compromise the accuracy of the data. This together with knowing exactly what to measure and how to measure it optimally is a problem for the scientists, hence the response from "Ian" to MF, which to my mind was a little embarrassing. You can't measure something and then say it is inaccurate because it doesn't fit the theory you prefer. That's unscientific, right?
The question is: is it accurate enough to represent the basic truths about the golf swing and blow up any silly theories offered by others? Probably is, IMHO.
Brian Manzella
Administrator
My whole point in using any of this stuff is to blow up the goofy theory of the pelvis continuing to turn with no decel.
It can't.
It doesn't.
Now, most below average to above average golfers need MORE slide, MORE rotation, and MORE extend. But they still will have decel.
It can't.
It doesn't.
Now, most below average to above average golfers need MORE slide, MORE rotation, and MORE extend. But they still will have decel.
Michael Finney
New
I posted ian's comments on the torso numbers for one reason - to put the truth out there...
He designed the damn machine and he's in a postion to know
He designed the damn machine and he's in a postion to know
I believe someone said sometime ago that using a club like a club was a good idea. Now who was that again?
But anyone who thinks this data is totally accurate or all encompassing is very naive. These machines and the whole measuring process in in its infancy and as such will have teething problems which will compromise the accuracy of the data. This together with knowing exactly what to measure and how to measure it optimally is a problem for the scientists, hence the response from "Ian" to MF, which to my mind was a little embarrassing. You can't measure something and then say it is inaccurate because it doesn't fit the theory you prefer. That's unscientific, right?
The question is: is it accurate enough to represent the basic truths about the golf swing and blow up any silly theories offered by others? Probably is, IMHO.
That's why there is the need for a lot--the more the better--of data points, then you can see trends in the data more clearly. Ian, I think, was merely pointing out reasons for outliers in the data, which is essential in the scientific process.
Last edited:
dschultz6072
New
At what point are we seeing the data reflecting when the person stops swinging the club and the club starts swinging the person? Surely the force from swinging a club with a weight on the end of it at over 100 mph has the effect of jarring your body in such a way that balance is required to stop from falling over. Hmm?
drewyallop
New
My question too Lia. Where are the accelerations - numerical and graphical?
Brian Manzella
Administrator
I have done a video and it is uploading now....fun stuff.
Play nice boys...
Play nice boys...
Brian Manzella
Administrator
Fun with Lines!
<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/54171919?badge=0" width="820" height="461" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen="" mozallowfullscreen="" allowfullscreen=""></iframe> <a< html=""></a<>
<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/54171919?badge=0" width="820" height="461" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen="" mozallowfullscreen="" allowfullscreen=""></iframe> <a< html=""></a<>
Kevin Shields
Super Moderator
Great video, Brian.
- Status