What Mass is involved in the strike?
- Thread starter George_Connor
- Start date
- Status
Does that mean you didn't understand what I was getting at?
Let me try again. You used the argument that Mandrin's assessment was not entirely correct because it did not simulate real golf, therefore does not relate to a real golfing situation.
You are asserting that a ball behaves differently when it strikes a club where nothing except a string is attached to the shaft compared to a club that is clamped.
Using your argument about Mandrin's work then related to your assessment: real golf is played with a clamp(hands) on the shaft, therefore your assessment is not entirely correct nor does it relate to a real golfing situation.
You get what I mean?
magicmarker
New
Out of curiosity Lia, what is it that you are hypothesizing. I assume that you feel clamped vs unclamped during impact will make a difference on the ball flight.
If the club is moving the same way whether it is clamped or it isn't (controlled variable), I personally can't see how there is enough time for the ball to react in two different ways. The club would react differently I imagine but I don't see how the ball would be able to. There must be something deeper beneath the surface of this argument that you are rooted to, or is this it.
If this is it, how would your hypothesis change the way a club should be swung, or be taught to be swung?
Just curious, thanks.
If the club is moving the same way whether it is clamped or it isn't (controlled variable), I personally can't see how there is enough time for the ball to react in two different ways. The club would react differently I imagine but I don't see how the ball would be able to. There must be something deeper beneath the surface of this argument that you are rooted to, or is this it.
If this is it, how would your hypothesis change the way a club should be swung, or be taught to be swung?
Just curious, thanks.
mandrin
New
Dear lia's aim is a bit tipsy topsy. Not really enjoying simply hitting a golf ball with a club but instead wanting to shoot golf balls at dangling/clamped clubs - well to each his own.
I found him two interesting video clips. One shows how to make a golf ball cannon and another showing how you can really torture a golf ball shooting it at high speed at a steel plate.
Pneumatic Golfball Cannon- Shoots 450+ yards!
Golf Ball 70,000fps 150mph - YouTube
I found him two interesting video clips. One shows how to make a golf ball cannon and another showing how you can really torture a golf ball shooting it at high speed at a steel plate.
Pneumatic Golfball Cannon- Shoots 450+ yards!
Golf Ball 70,000fps 150mph - YouTube
lia41985
New member
Clamped versus dangling club
Ball fired at the same "spot" on the face (non CoG) -- somewhat analogically related to a golfing mishit
How does the ball react differently based on how the club is "secured"?
Logical fallacies...what?
Something deeper? Always, baby
Slowly...though
Ball fired at the same "spot" on the face (non CoG) -- somewhat analogically related to a golfing mishit
How does the ball react differently based on how the club is "secured"?
Logical fallacies...what?
Something deeper? Always, baby
Slowly...though
Last edited:
faux_maestro
New
You must have stopped reading/thinking after you read what you bolded.
No
Oh Lia, you know what happens when one makes assumptions.
I'm just trying to figure out what the hell this clamped/unclamped business has to do with hitting a golf ball. I still don't get what this has to do with the real world of golf....or the original point of this thread.
Last edited:
Clamped versus dangling club
Ball fired at the same "spot" on the face (non CoG) -- somewhat analogically related to a golfing mishit
How does the ball react differently based on how the club is "secured"?
Logical fallacies...what?
Something deeper? Always, baby
Slowly...though
Hands still on the club on a mishit, not a string.
Oh well, I'll be waiting on your breakthrough information.
lia41985
New member
But how the hands are situated on the club (i.e. the grip) helps to determine the "securedness" with which the club is held/clamped. And if most strikes are some degree of a mishit then...
If release style/closure rate/face stability/gear effect/clamping are all irrelevant then why does a pattern like Never Hook Again advocate reverse swiveling and Never Slice Again a wedding ring up swivel?
Part of the mass is how the mass of the arms/wrists/hands torque the club. I really thought we could agree on that. Sigh.
Last edited:
Not irrelevant, out of the player's control close to and during impact.
So, why the string?
Not exactly on a string, but certainly shows the effect of shockwaves on the club but not the ball. In any case, definitely not clamped.
Kyle Reifers breaks driver on tee shot at Crowne Plaza Inv at Colonial (2012) - YouTube
Kyle Reifers breaks driver on tee shot at Crowne Plaza Inv at Colonial (2012) - YouTube
Ultimate "I" guy that Iverson. Would hate to have been a teammate of his. He should have been a golfer or tennis player.
Out of control immediately prior to, during impact, and immediately following ball/club separation. Is that the disagreement?
Extremes. Ah, but, as you dismissed Mandrin's example because he omitted oblique strikes, golf is not played with strings.
One of the best interview rants ever! Allan played in an alternate universe!
Lindsey Newman
New
Yeah, tell that to Mike Singletary (as a player). Passionate, trainable, constrainable and maintainable. I know, I know, the exception proves the rule. Passion with discipline is chicken and waffles.
Yes, but let's not get into the topic of there being one optimal technique for this thread.
I'd take a guy like Reggie Miller any day over Iverson. He worked with his teammates at practice and in games.
Last edited:
birly-shirly
New
I expect at least one person to say that video says I'm loco but in doing so offer no reason for why. Conclusory that would be
This horse has been dead near a week, and you won't stop flogging it - but in doing so, won't offer any reason for why.
There just might, even yet, be some posters willing to engage with you if you'd just cut the pseudo-gnostic crap and describe what you actually did in your experiment and what it yielded. But of course, there are risks in that level of disclosure, aren't there?
- Status