I do not have access to such graphs. However, in your graph and in your description thereof you are saying that torso rotation and applied torques are decreasing into impact. This would mean that prior to impact inertia is applied to the club prior to impact and then only the speed of the clubhead is directing force into the ball.
Now, to understand ABS, reverse your graph. Initially there is not much force applied to the club through transition. Only at the 3rd figure on your graph where the hands are nearing the front of the body is force from both torso rotation and deliberately applied forearm rotation directed to the club.
No, the model golfer’s torso is increasing its own torque into impact but it’s still slowing down due to the lead arm and shoulder girdle slowing down (and dragging on the torso) as the club releases. The golfer will try his best to limit the deceleration of his torso increasing by increasing torso torque, but it’s not enough to stop it slowing down into impact.
Not sure what you mean when you say
" This would mean that prior to impact inertia is applied to the club prior to impact and then only the speed of the clubhead is directing force into the ball."
There are eccentric forces being applied at the grip which will angularly accelerate the club approaching impact.
“Now, to understand ABS, reverse your graph. Initially there is not much force applied to the club through transition. Only at the 3rd figure on your graph where the hands are nearing the front of the body is force from both torso rotation and deliberately applied forearm rotation directed to the club.”
So if I’ve got this correct your torso pivot will do the following:
The pivot will cause the right arm to push in the purple arrow direction while the left arm will be forced to pull in the blue arrow direction. There will be components of these 2 forces tangential to the hand path which will accelerate the hands/grip in that dotted path.
At the same time you will applying forearm rotation to rotate the club in space like described in this video below
You can clearly shaft bend which I assume will be caused by the assertive torso pivot and application of forearm rotation on the grip.
I am assuming ABS assume that actively accelerating the upper torso and forearm rotation will retain that lag into and through impact.
But you are making an error in your assumption due to a simple fact that the lagging shaft bend does not rotate with the club shaft . The shaft bend that you see in Paul Wilson’s image, if retained into impact will actually end up as clubshaft droop like the middle image below.
It is very non-intuitive but was proven by Dave Tutelman in the experiment below (shown on youtube).
Yes, that is what I am saying. Homer Kelley also discussed this in Chapter 2 of The Golfing Machine. It’s just obvious stuff, nothing overly scientific about it. Common sense.
We are not going to be arguing this stuff anymore.
I showed this clearly in the two videos I shot… that shaft flex can be held into impact and beyond.
Posting videos of people who are not applying ABS protocols and then proclaiming that as some kind of scientific proof won’t be discussed here further. The playing in the video is using lightweight frying pan. Of course he can’t hold shaft flex with that long and light of a club. The club moves too quickly from the top and can’t maintain a state of acceleration. It’s the same reason Tiger was a laser sharp iron player yet struggled with keeping the driver in the same zip code. It’s not Tiger, it’s the golf club. Posting frying pan swings here do nothing proving your claims, only support why we don’t promote using them for shots requiring accurate driving.
I have shown this not to be true, so I would suggest you take these unproven theories back over the Jeff’s site so you can ponder it there.
I don’t teach anything I can’t clearly show or demonstrate to be true.
In the graph you posted, again you are making assumptions that are not inclusive of all golfers…maybe the one in the graph, but this is not a comprehensive or universal protocol for all golf swings.
While you don’t “expect” us to understand you… we certainly don’t “expect” you to understand us, since time and time again, you can’t acknowledge the difference between a hitting or swinging methodology into the strike. You have repeatedly alluded that there is no such difference etc… when in fact there is.
I doubt you understand the concept and application of “cohesive body tension” which would be directly related to your graph. If you don’t understand CBT and don’t have a way to measure it, then any such discussion will fall upon deaf ears. It’s like two people speaking different languages. This is real stuff.
There is no active right arm/hand push in that image. It’s the upper torso pivot pushing the right ‘shoulder/arm/hand’ on the grip. That is how an upper body pivot can apply forces to the grip to move it along that dotted path. Of course in a real golfer, the right arm would be bent rather than straight (as shown in the model) but the physics is the same.
I’m not using Paul Wilson’s swing to prove anything, just that image frame to show lag that I assume would be something that ABS would try and create and retain by active forearm rotation and accelerating the torso pivot into/through impact.
As I’ve mentioned before, the lag shown will become clubhead droop because the shaft flex stays in its own plane and doesn’t rotate with the shaft. You’d have to be very strong and quick to try and create lagging flex later in the downswing that is more aligned with the ball-target line approaching impact because the club is moving very fast indeed.
I’m sure one of your ABS students will someday be curious as to whether they retain lagging shaft into impact and might get measured on GEARS /ENSO or filmed with a phantom camera. Until that day comes there is no point debating this any further.
