Nobody gets it until they learn it…
1 Like
I said “if you really wanted to study different golf techniques”.
Anyhow, I’ve raised enough posts to show, from a scientific perspective that some of the ABS claims seem questionable. If however, you can provide evidence to disprove the science, then the biomechanics community will need to reconsider their own findings.
Good luck with ABS .
To be honest… I don’t really care about your opinions and what you continue to question. I’ve proven these things numerous times here… so if you still don’t get it… well, you never will I guess. Why you keep bringing up the same things is beyond me.
How about starting a new topic?
2 Likes
So here again… no golf ball… just swinging above the mat… clearly holding shaft flex beyond lowpoint. Proof? No?
Dubious says: I question John doing this. It’s not happening because Jeff Mann and Tutleman say this is not possible nor is it beneficial to do so. The laws of physics according to “The world of sciences according to Jeff Mann, Dubious, Tuttleman” has declared this isn’t possible nor is it happening even though this capture shows it to be happening. It can’t be happening and I question John’s ablility to do this even though he is showing us he’s doing it. He’s not doing it, because we know this isn’t happening even though we see it’s happening it’s clearly not happening because it can’t happen because current laws of physics support this isn’t happening even though it is… it’s actually isn’t because it can’t because … well… I just question it.
4 Likes
Try getting a photo image before you hit the ball. Of course you will get shaft flex after impact (see video gif below). It’s easy for you to provide the proof of shaft flex before impact as I’m sure you have friends in the golfing industry who use GEARS , ENSO or have a camera with a fast global shutter (or maybe not).
This is my last post on your forum - good luck.
In movement, high speed camera, not based upon still shots. Yes, it’s possible…
I think now we can officially move on from this discussion.
5 Likes
Pics of those beauties please!
Not sure why there was/is such a big debate? People that hold shaft flex have club head accelerating through impact and those that don’t, the club has already started its deceleration through impact. Do I have this right? What is the big controversy?
That’s somewhat right, and the best way to think about it IMO. To be annoying, an accelerating club head is not sufficient to guarantee shaft flex. This is probably not a tangent worth exploring, but the part of me that suffered through a math major feels inclined to point that out…
I think most understand that concept. I think what’s being debated is whether that’s actually possible in a golf swing. And whether people can and do accomplish that. Hence, the chaos that has ensued.
Beautiful! The Hogan designs with the toe relief are my favorites. Thank you for sharing.
It’s always been interesting to me, how the latest research from the major manufacturers has led them to this exact toe-relief design. Mr. Hogan obviously knew what he was doing in everything he touched.
I see your point and it does somewhat track, but I think you have a misunderstanding about radar units or other forms of launch monitors. Radar units are absolutely measuring and tracking the ball as well as the clubhead. The newest updates track and measure the delivered lie angle, the strike location on the face, the speed of the clubhead, the resulting speed of the ball, the angle of attack, the face angle, the swing direction, the resultant path, etc. To the credit of you post, some of that stuff is calculated, but the majority of the things being tracked are actually measured. This technology is used to track missiles to the inch at hundreds of miles. And then you look at camera based units, like Foresight, and they are tracking and measuring in real time at extremely high frame rates. Those kinds of units are using a ballflight algorithm, but they are very much tracking and measuring the impact interval. And then GEARS is in an entirely different league as far as measurement and accuracy.
If the clubhead is traveling X mph and the ball exits at Y miles per hour then the mass of the clubhead is figured into that. If you swung a modern driver at 110 mph and the ball left at 165 mph and then you swing a heavier driver at 100 mph and the ball left at 150 mph then that says they’re both leaving at 1.5 times the clubhead speed and you would know the mass is irrelevant. No amount of formulas will change the fact that a heavier club requires more force to move at the same speed as a lighter one and that older clubs have less coefficient of restitution due to clubhead construction, the ability to move the center of mass around with newer technology, and the ability to make the faces thinner. If you hit balls on Trackman you can measure you clubhead speed with whatever club you want to measure it with and you can measure the exit velocity of the ball and then you can reverse engineer the math.
1 Like
The fact is that we can and have used GEARS to measure all of this. We know when the maximum hand speed during a swing occurs. We know the rate of hand acceleration and deceleration. We know the acceleration profile of the clubhead and where it peaks. We can measure the bend and droop of a shaft and see exactly how and where it loads and kicks.
The bottom line is that everything the club gets is ultimately transported to it through the hands. That transfer is done with both forces and torques at the grip and then into the club. The maximum speed of the hands is about mid downswing/left arm parallel. Once the club starts to throw out outside the hands (which is has to do in all swings to hit the ball) it starts putting force back into the golfer that has to be dealt with. The hands start slowing down because it’s simply impossible to overcome all of that and keep accelerating. This causes the club and shaft to respond in kind and it kicks forward. ALL golf shots EVER HIT with a full swing have the clubshaft in lead deflection at impact regardless of any subjective feels or intentions. There’s simply no way around it and, frankly, the heavier the clubhead the more lead deflection the club should be in.
I really don’t even know why it’s an argument or why anybody cares. It doesn’t invalidate any teaching or instruction in ABS. Just because it doesn’t/can’t happen doesn’t mean it’s not valid as an intent or objective. Just because the hand speed picks up very quickly during early to mid downswing doesn’t mean the intent to have the fastest speed post impact isn’t valid. We don’t perceive things in real time during the swing and it takes different intents and feels to make things happen in the right time and space. Feeling something earlier or later than it really happens is okay. If the instruction is sound and the results are good then it doesn’t matter if it matches up to reality.
I don’t think I agree with much of what you’re saying here, but I want to make sure I fully understand you first.
The bottom line is that everything the club gets is ultimately transported to it through the hands. That transfer is done with both forces and torques at the grip and then into the club.
Assuming that you’re not merely saying the trite tautology that “the hands are the only parts of us that touch the club so ultimately it’s the hands that impart anything to the club,” are you saying that the hands are the only motors so-to-speak that applies a force/torque on the club? That is, if the trail elbow is “frozen” and the torso is applying more force/torque than the forearms/wrists just before and at impact, do you consider that still as only the hands imparting anything to the club?
The maximum speed of the hands is about mid downswing/left arm parallel. … ALL golf shots EVER HIT with a full swing have the clubshaft in lead deflection at impact regardless of any subjective feels or intentions.
Are you basing this bold assertion on observation or theory? If the former, are you considering the techniques employed by those you’re observing? If the latter, is your model based on a particular technique or assumption on what the golfer is doing?
I’m simply saying that the hands are the only thing touching the club. Anything you do with your body ultimately has to make it to the hands and then to the club. If you move your right pinky toe in a certain way and you’re confident that it has some impact on your swing then that right pinky toe movement has to get to the hands in order to get to the club. There is no other way.
I’m also saying that there are invisible things going on. You may see a certain motion being performed, but the forces and torques are hidden. The actual direction of a force or a torque is hidden because it’s invisible. This is one of the problems looking at still images of swings. You could, for example, take a still of a golfer mid downswing and note the position of his wrist, the angle of the clubface, the position of the club, etc. and make assumptions…but the fact of the matter is the force at that particular point in the swing could be perpendicular to the shaft and the golfer could be torquing the club longitudinally around itself an incredible amount. You may not see it on video either because the direction and amounts of force and torque are all instantaneous and ever changing.
I’m basing my assertion on lots of things. A. The science from swing researchers and shaft makers B. GEARS data that is observable and reproducible and C. Players own statements throughout the history of golf. There’s a reason great players have talked about pulling down from the top, pulling with the last three fingers of their lead hand, rising a bell, releasing from the top, etc. In transition they are using their body for stabilization and the ground for friction and they are pulling the club down. Period. They are getting speed into their hands from the top of the backswing to left arm parallel. Then the arc of the clubhead gets outside of their hands and starts slowing their hands down as the speed begins to transmit into the club. And the hands continue to brake as clubhead speed accelerates. It has to transmit…there is no way to keep accelerating the hands. PGA Tour hand speed peeks around 24-27 mph and clubhead speeds are 115-120 mph. The hands cannot keep up. Look at GEARS data, I think it actually backs up a lot of what ABS talks about…you aren’t holding angles and pulling or dragging the grip through. You release the club and transmit the power from the hands to the club.
EDIT: And to be clear, I’m not saying this is something conscious or an intentional swing down of the hands. I’m saying it just happens. It has to. It’s physics.
Not necessarily. The club head can either reel outside the hands like you state, or, the hands can acquire the pivot even more and gain centripetal force while the club head stays inside the hands, no slowing down either, that’s when the fun starts.
1 Like
I can think of two illustrations where the physics of two moving objects (for our sake we can consider one the hands and the other the clubhead) launch a projectile without reducing speed nor acceleration.
- A trebuchet - a form of catapult where there is a solid arm and a loose suspended sling holding the projectile. The arm rotates at an accelerating rate around a pivot point and the sling releases the projectile without the arm slowing until after the projectile is launched.
- a water skier - the boat moves at a constant or increasing speed and the skier accelerates to a jump through centrifugal force. The skier takes the jump yet neither the boat nor rope slow prior to or during the jump.
1 Like