Im not seeing it @Fore_Thirty .
I see the holy grail…pretty damn impressive to guys like us. Its hard to explain how much strength that takes. I rarely do it with modern clubs, but when i do its worth chasing.
This is why i drill with vintage gear. Only way to know im doing it right.
If its mm then its mm, feel is real…
Great video. As a quick aside, seeing your transition FO clears up the question I had in another thread regarding keeping the hands close to the right thigh. Now I get it. Thank you.
Seems like a little forward bend to me from this angle.
Why did you hit the ball so low ? The ball sped off along the ground.
Maybe because I am hitting an 8 degree persimmon driver off a mat? No tee… so… yeah… loooooowwwwwwww…
Forward lean? What does that have to do with holding shaft flex? Forward lean in the previous two captures as well.
Ball position? Slightly back because I am hitting off the ground. Why? Harder to do… asks more of me to refine lowpoint control… real stuff.
Does GEARS calculate the degree of forearm rotation acceleration in an active manner vs a passive hand throw? I don’t know, but I really doubt it.
Sure the hands slow down… but the forearm rotation can increase and accelerate.
Hips and shoulders delay or slow… sure, but then accelerate.
Is the acceleration of the hips and torso/shoulders connecting to the golf ball? Is GEARS going to measure the rigidity of the internal cohesive body tensions that need to exist to make sure this happens properly? Again, I really doubt there is a machine that is going to take all this stuff into account.
Believe, me, I’ll be poking and exposing holes in this stuff really quickly if it’s not consistent with reality.
He said forward bend, not forward lean…lead deflection. But like I said quite a bit earlier in this thread, 2D is a really bad way to do this.
Of course forearm rotation increases. Who’s ever claimed otherwise? That’s partly why the hands have to decelerate…the club has a lot of closing to do from P6 to P7 and the forces and torques you apply have to rapidly change your hand path and the orientation of the club. The rate of closure of the clubface, in degrees, is astounding even for someone who doesn’t appear to close the face.
That’s what I’ve been saying all along. The hand speed is peaking at P5ish as the arc of the clubhead moves outside the hand path. And then as everything changes directions and the hand path starts bending the hand acceleration cannot keep up the quickly overtaking club that is picking up speed and effective weight rapidly.
GEARS does not measure internal body tensions. GEARS does not tell you what your intent was. It does not tell you what your feel was. It does not tell you where in time and space you perceived things. It measures what you and the club did. The offer gave you the whole day and even a second. You can test any and all feels, intents, swinging, hitting, old clubs, new clubs, flat clubs, upright clubs, old balls, new balls, off a tee, off the ground, irons, woods, center stikes, off center strikes, hitting cross handed, hitting off your knees, whatever you want. I’m sure they won’t mind any test you want to do. And the data will say what it says and if there are things you want that it can’t do then that will have to be a limitation for the time being. I’m sure you could call Michael Neff and he will tell you everything GEARS can measure and how it’s done.
What you refuse to understand is that you could have 90 degree angle of the clubshaft and left arm (caddy view) right before impact, and you would then apply forearm rotation into the strike actively… fast and quick to put pressure in the shaft. You think this is impossible, but it’s not at all. It’s exactly what I am doing here, and what Hogan talked about as well…“three right hands”. He wasn’t just blowing smoke.
That being said, it’s not a popular modern technique because there isn’t nearly as much emphasis on laser accurate ball striking… but this is how you do it.
The active forearm rotation also puts massive feel into the hands of the striker. It’s really the lifeblood of the hitter. We also use that to control ball flight… draws, fades etc… in a way that isn’t taught anymore either. I think it’s just more a case of lost knowledge. Too many distractions from technology and gadgets etc… golfers are not looking at ball fight, shot shape, trajectory, or thinking about what the ball is going to do after it hits the ground.
Flight scopes, trackman, none of that stuff takes into consideration if the fairways are dry or wet, slope of the terrain and how the player is going to work the ball into that, and combinations of wind and elevation changes. It’s all such an incomplete picture.
You’re making a false assumption here… it’s not fact…
This again is your swingers mindset…
The combination of forearm rotation with active wrist uncocking in unison CAN keep pressure on the shaft. I just showed you this on the video this morning.
Trackman just tracks and measures. It tells you how you delivered the club and how the ball responded and flew. And it can tell you the impact wind had on the ball. It can help tell you if you’re perceiving things correctly. Lots of good players feel like they swung with a left path when they hit hooks…a launch monitor can quickly help cure that perception. It says nothing of the mechanics involved…that’s still up to the player/instructor to figure out.
Oh… well that is a serious problem… it really needs to…
If it is not able to address this… the picture is severely inadequate. It is NOT going to tell me what the body is doing. Cohesive body tensions are imperative considerations.
Trackman doesn’t know where I am aiming. It makes horrific assumptions about that and has no idea what lie angle my clubs are set up… nor does it include the mass of the clubhead, nor does it know if I was bringing into impact a pre stressed clubshaft. Way too incomplete a picture…
The grip of your golf club at the mid hands point accelerates from p4.1 to roughly P5. It then decelerates from roughly P5 to impact. P5 is max hand speed. The rest is deceleration as the clubhead is rapidly overtaking. The CoM of the clubhead, which is behind the face inside the head and also behind the mid hands point, then seeks to line up with the net force which causes the clubshaft to go into lead deflection.
Call Michael Neff. Call Sasho Mackenzie. Call Steven Nesbit. Call any of the other handful of PhDs who study this stuff with post graduate level physics knowledge.
Trackman is aimed. You can aim it to any target you want. If you aim it at the blue flag and hit to the red flag it would tell you what your face and path was in relation to the blue flag. It may say you swung 10 degrees left with a 10 degrees closed clubface. The result would read as straight pull with appropriate launch conditions…and exactly to the target you reall aimed at. It’s measuring exactly what happened. I’f you set the correct target line the face and path would read 0 instead of -10.
Trackman doesn’t know what lie angle your club is set to, but it absolutely damn sure knows what lie angle you presented at impact. That’s simply fact.
As you’ve already been told in this thread by someone other than myself, Trackman measures the speed of the club and the launch speed of the ball. It then calculates smash factor based on that collision. If mass is relevant it’s reported in the sum of that collision.
You’re not bringing a pre stressed shaft into impact. It’s in lead deflection. And that is absolutely factored into the the tracking of the clubhead’s CoM and it’s relevance to path, low point, and face angle.
You’re being silly now…
A PHD or a while lab coat is not any kind of guarantee of absolute knowledge regarding the golf swing.
I was one of the early test subjects of TGM. I’ve been around these types my whole life and their knowledge may be impressive to some, but I have found the scientific community within golf to be less than underwhelming.
I just showed you the error of your thinking about the shaft deflection. For some reason you can’t understand forearm rotation keeping pressure on the shaft with active muscular application. You really are stuck in a passive hand belief system.
The folks you mentioned might also align with your belief, but I would prove them all wrong and send them back with dirt on their lab coats. It’s how science works.
Then do it. I’d love to see the results. I’m sure any of the golf researchers would be more than happy to hop on a Zoom meeting or a podcast with you and discuss. I’m sure Michael Neff and/or any of the other researchers would love looking at your GEARS data showing shaft flex being held.
And I don’t subscribe to a “passive hand belief system”. I simply don’t believe in “hitting” or “swinging” as described by TGM or in the ABS convention. I’ve been down the TGM road too…it wasn’t science or swing research.
Thanks for that, I’ll have a look around.
I’m a bit like Feynman myself, seeing as he’s been mentioned a few times, in that I’m skeptical of certainty, it’s why I hold the middle ground on here. I don’t know enough about either side of the debate to be sure, but saying everyone does x or y raises alarm bells for me.
But I know golf well enough to know that if the clubhead starts swinging the golfer, it’s game over, however that plays out in the ‘scientific’ world, I can’t say.
9 min point - Manuel de la Torre talking about the fastest point in the swing, and how they measured it back in the 80’s.
My understanding is that the club has to be accelerating at the ball to reach that fastest point past the ball.
( I know the discussion is about holding shaft flex, but found it interesting)
