What the Golfer CAN and CAN'T do during Impact

[spktho]

Ah, so a point be made here is that "possibly" rate of closure has to do with path and shaft angle coming down? And that rotation from the core could have an influence on all of those variables? And... And... it's "possible" that the face could counter rotate when the shaft backs up from steep to shallow and um it's also possible that when swinging inside out that that that you could flip and roll the shaft and face?

NO SH!T!

All of this has been true forever and if you are going from closed to open it started long before last parallel. And is the chatacteristic of every bad move I have ever witnessed.

Ya, I think that's why I still don't understand the argument. Most of the argument sounds like the same things that have been discussed a long time ago, just with different terms. The twistaway closes the face, no? and it's done way before impact. Tumble and extending the right wrist works to close the face and it's set up way before impact, no? And there are many more examples of how to gain better face control here.

Now if "they" are also claiming to be able to control the club face during the impact interval and immediately right after, then that's another story that Brian has done well in explaining what is currently known.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Here is a pic with some obviously approximate numbers.

BUT!!

Isn't<wbr> it OBVIOUS that the golfer can't speed up the release from 3000° to 5100° per second !!!???


...And, to me, the 3000° is influenced by the heel-side of the CG strike.


.

 

[cwdlaw223]

One other thing, why is the poster boy (Furyk) for a "slow rate of closure" one of the gimpiest drivers on tour #166? When is the contradiction going to stop.

Because people think they can increase friction without heat! RoC can slow down if you slow down the swing. Only the Casio guys argue that the RoC can decrease while maintaining or increasing such decrease in RoC is material enough to significantly reduce shot dispersion/clubface control. It's not that easy!

10,000 hours!!!! No way around it in golf.

 

[spktho]

1. Open right before, no..............close LESS, yes. and I am not talking about the moment of impact, but several frames before and during the impact interval. So I dont think you can have a face closing, make a determination with your brain to open the face .000001 before impact, its not possible.

Wouldn't even slowing the club face from closing effectively be exerting a club face opening torque?

And how much is "several frames"?

 

[Brian Manzella]

Just plain goofy.

 

[gmbtempe]

Wouldn't even slowing the club face from closing effectively be exerting a club face opening torque?

And how much is "several frames"?

I would look at it from the opposite viewpoint, wouldn't requiring the clubface to close more in order to deliver a square (ish) club face result in needing less timing element in your swing?

I am thinking from P6.5 to P7.5

I said closing less, I never stated you should try and slow down the club face into impact, that is not close to anything I have stated.

 

[Lindsey Newman]

Depends on where and what you truly consider timing to be. I would think driving a shut club face with a set wrist position coming out of transition to be less timing. But, I see where you're coming from in terms of thinking in maxims. Nothing is or will ever be easy. Every change you incorporate in technique will alter timing.

We keep going round and round about ROC and it's a lot like people who use there fingers to count as adults. Eventually there is very little in "rate of return" in terms of the search for efficiency.

Dariusz is correct in a lot of ways in focusing on automation, but it does have to work for the individual. All of our focus to theses infinitely finite details of portions of the swing, that move so fast that the brain cannot control, is beginning to move into ther relm of insanity.

SLOW MOTION video in golf is a lot like watching video of crushing hits in football. At some point you have to remember what it's like to actually move that fast.

SLOW MOTION IS NOT REAL, IT SIMPLY DOES NOT EXIST!

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

You know, this is probably the first time ever I've had the attitude regarding this idea of just shaking my head. I don't understand how you can believe something so adamantly when all the proof is telling you otherwise.

 

[spktho]

I would look at it from the opposite viewpoint, wouldn't requiring the clubface to close more in order to deliver a square (ish) club face result in needing less timing element in your swing?

I am thinking from P6.5 to P7.5

I said closing less, I never stated you should try and slow down the club face into impact, that is not close to anything I have stated.

I struggled for a long time with a too open club face, which may be why I'm struggling with understanding this, because I definitely try to close the club face at transition and keep it there through impact, which for my swing means having it usually square to some times too closed. But would rather see a hook than a slice

My question was not intended to be read stopping at "slowing down the club face". Need the "rotation" in there. Let me rephrase:

From transition, the club face is rotated or twisted (closing) to be square(ish) at impact. You stated you thought the club face could "close less several frames before impact". That, to me, says that the clubface is changing in rotational orientation and the rotation about the shaft is slowing, which would require a negative or an opposite twist (opening the club face twist) from the closing rotation?

If you've ever played tennis, this argument seems to be saying that you can set up to hit a top spin forehand, start the swing going slightly up and rotating the racket by pronating the forearm and internally rotating the upper arm around to get on top of the ball and impart the topspin, but a foot before impacting the ball switch to a backspin shot, which requires the opposite motions. Is this a good analogy?

By the way, I've seen the number references to swing positions before and don't know the positions. Could you describe where P6.5 and P7.5 are? Thanks

Oh, by the way, slowing the rotational closing would effectively slow the club face too. Would probably be a pretty negligible slowing, though.

 

[GeoffDickson]

If you've ever played tennis, this argument seems to be saying that you can set up to hit a top spin forehand, start the swing going slightly up and rotating the racket by pronating the forearm and internally rotating the upper arm around to get on top of the ball and impart the backspin, but a foot before impacting the ball switch to a backspin shot, which requires the opposite motions. Is this a good analogy?

I think it is..because both seem impossible to me.

 

[Dariusz J.]

Dariusz is correct in a lot of ways in focusing on automation, but it does have to work for the individual.

Thank you for objectivity.
Yes, it does have to, but in order to gather all possible concepts that can contribute vividly to a partial automating of a given fragment of the whole motion one needs to build macroscale concepts first and treat all men equally and generally while not touching individual causes.

Cheers

 

[mgranato]

You know, this is probably the first time ever I've had the attitude regarding this idea of just shaking my head. I don't understand how you can believe something so adamantly when all the proof is telling you otherwise.

I know the answer to that one... much to most of the proof is emanating from this site. And for a handful of anit-Manzella zealots, that's too much to handle, and it's a beautiful thing!

 

[tbone1065]

I have to agree with you MG. A couple of other nameless sites (nameless because only a secret few know they exist) are down right painful to read. The owners come off as jilted lovers hellbent on revenge....truth be damned. If they only realized how embarrassing to themselves they appear.

 

[gmbtempe]

I struggled for a long time with a too open club face, which may be why I'm struggling with understanding this, because I definitely try to close the club face at transition and keep it there through impact, which for my swing means having it usually square to some times too closed. But would rather see a hook than a slice

My question was not intended to be read stopping at "slowing down the club face". Need the "rotation" in there. Let me rephrase:

From transition, the club face is rotated or twisted (closing) to be square(ish) at impact. You stated you thought the club face could "close less several frames before impact". That, to me, says that the clubface is changing in rotational orientation and the rotation about the shaft is slowing, which would require a negative or an opposite twist (opening the club face twist) from the closing rotation?

If you've ever played tennis, this argument seems to be saying that you can set up to hit a top spin forehand, start the swing going slightly up and rotating the racket by pronating the forearm and internally rotating the upper arm around to get on top of the ball and impart the topspin, but a foot before impacting the ball switch to a backspin shot, which requires the opposite motions. Is this a good analogy?

By the way, I've seen the number references to swing positions before and don't know the positions. Could you describe where P6.5 and P7.5 are?

.

P1 - Address
P2 - Club parallel with target line
P3 - Hands parallel with target line (9 oclock)
P4 - top swing
P5 - opposite of P3 but downswing
P6 - opposite of P2 but downswing (delivery position, last parallel)
P7 - impact
P8 - club parallel
P9 - finish

It just seems so my easy to type a letter and number to identify a position in a swing. The first time I learned this system was two years ago with a MORAD instructor, its also coincidentally the first time I had heard how several factors influenced how the club face was closing.......and definitely the first time I had heard of Rate of Closure, but reading this thread one might think it was recently created by the "casio boys" (have no idea when the term was popularized, could have been 50 years ago).

 

[Brian Manzella]

Understand why I don't use it Greg.

It is subtle propaganda....

Anyway, I think Homer Kelley's sections are better.

 

[cwdlaw223]

Brian -

What else should we use to describe a swing location? I understand the possible propoganda issue, but using letters and numbers makes it much, much easier to communicate swing location.

 

[curtisj76]

There's 2 types of golfers that come to this site:

#1 Guys that just want to get better at golf
#2 Guys that want to get better at golf AND learn all the "science stuff"

Anyways, I'm #1 and have no idea what Brian just said............all I want to know is do we want to hit the ball on A, B, or C?

THANKS

Sorry but once again where are we supposed to hit it? A B or C? What happened to hitting it above A? I thought that was the best???

 

[Brian Manzella]

Address

Takeaway

First Parallel

Left Arm level

The top

The transition

Left arm level

Last parallel pre impact

Both arms straight/the follow-through

Parallel after impact

The Swivel

One last point

The Finish


98% of everyone will know what you are talking about

 

[JonWil]

Sorry but once again where are we supposed to hit it? A B or C? What happened to hitting it above A? I thought that was the best???

Bump

 

[Brian Manzella]

There is absolutely NO WAY to tell where the CG of the clubhead + bottom 5-6" of the shaft unit is by looking at it.

I talked to a PGA Tour teacher last night who saw a player hit three new "identical" drivers all in the dead middle, and one them produced wildly different shots.

Just use something to mark the face, and see where YOU need to hit it to make the ball do what you want it to.

On TrackMan, it is easy to find it, because it is the only spot on the face—with a given path combo—that will produce shots that go where you'd think they should.