|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 4, 2013 0:14:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jan 4, 2013 9:48:38 GMT -5
Jeff -
It's more of a question of does the speed affect the path than the path affect the speed. I suspect the answer is mixed and what I was hoping was some discussion about forces and torques. I can slow my swing down and get more normal path readings, but I sacrifice at least a club and a half.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 4, 2013 10:14:44 GMT -5
cwdlaw223
Based on your photo posted in BM's forum, it looks like a straight pull ball flight. That suggests that there is very ittle divergence between the path/face at impact. I would suspect that you are adding right arm to your downswing action, and that you are either coming OTT or you are flipping to a small degree if the straightening right arm/right wrist produces a push-force against the shaft in the late downswing.
How about posting a DTL and face-on Casio video of your swing when you hit the ball left? Then, one can study your golf swing biomechanics. TM cannot discern what is happening from a biomechanical perspective to cause your straight pulls.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jan 4, 2013 10:24:19 GMT -5
I'm not looking for advice about MY swing from a biomechanical standpoint and will probably never post a video of my swing. When I want biomechanical feedback I take lessons from people who can watch me swing and take video right then and there. I haven't found internet golfing lessons that effective. The shot was only a couple yards left. I play pull draws and I know I come over the top a little. I suspect I also flip according to your definition of a flip. I don't need more distance even if I reduced my "pro" flip. There were shots last night where I was trying to get the path more towards zero and it wasn't happening. I think the studo was a little cramped which affected my path. Could be the machine, I'm a Tman guy instead of F Scope Prime? ? ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 4, 2013 11:10:10 GMT -5
I am not talking about online lessons. I am talking about understanding cause-and-effect relationships between swing biomechanics and ball flight patterns. If you don't know whether you are coming OTT or flippng (and more specifically, to what degree) then you are not learning to understand why you are hitting the ball left. TM can tell you that your CH path is habitually left, but it cannot explain why it is happening. Video can provide the answers.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jan 4, 2013 11:13:58 GMT -5
TM was never designed to tell me why, only the what. Hopefully some discussion about forces and torques develop.
BTW - I come over the top and have a pro flip. It's how I play golf well under pressure. I don't like to hit straight shots under pressure and I'm not going to make a major swing change after playing competitive golf for 28 years (since I was 13). I don't have the time or desire to make a big change.
Posting a video and having people discuss your swing on the internet is a quasi lesson in my book. There are only a handful of people that I would trust when it comes to instruction and most of them are people who have played golf at a high level or work with students that play at a high level.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 4, 2013 12:51:21 GMT -5
cwdlaw223, I am not surprised that you do not want me to study your swing action using a swing analyser program. You are free to remain a pro-flipper, who also has an OTT swing action, but how can any forum member rationally comment on the "possible" forces/torques that cause you to produce a straight pull ball flight if they cannot study your golf swing biomechanics. From a generic perspective, I think that an OTT move, combined with an active right arm straightening action between P6 and P7, can easily produce the forces-torques necessary to cause a CH path that is out-to-in through impact. Also, adding a positive wrist torque in the late downswing can increase CH speed by a few mph - according to this article by David Tutelman. www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/handhit.phpJeff.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jan 4, 2013 13:59:43 GMT -5
I didn't ask anyone in this forum to comment or I would have posted the thread here. The forces/torques apply to all swings and not just my pattern. That's why I don't need to post a video. Art had a very good response about the forces/torques without needing video.
3D systems are much better than video IMO.
I don't post a video of my swing to avoid an inevitable fight. Best for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 4, 2013 14:22:35 GMT -5
Why do you anticipate a "fight"? I would only anticipate the possible expression of different/contrary opinions in this thread.
For example, Virtuoso posted his swing video, and I simply suggested that he try an experiment - and try and perform a delayed full-roll hand release action, which he successfully accomplished. That doesn't mean that he will choose to use that technique in the future, or that he thinks that it is a better (or worse) hand release action than his standard full-roll hand release action. He is "free" to harbor his own opinions and make his own decisions and there is no reason to "fight".
By the way, what do you learn from 3-D systems that you cannot learn from video?
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jan 4, 2013 15:23:07 GMT -5
Why a fight? Happens all of the time on the internet. It can be hard at times to differentiate between objective criticism and personal attacks. I prefer avoidance, especially when it comes to my own swing/psyche.
What can one learn from 3D systems that you can't from video? A lot. 3D systems give numbers and are more precise than eyeballing movement from video. Tapio didn't create his 3D system because he thought video was just as good at examining biomechanical movement.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 4, 2013 17:45:04 GMT -5
Reducing biomechanical movements to 3-D graphical numbers may seem precise, but why do you believe that it allows one to understand golf swing biomechanics better? What have you learned from a 3-D system (including Tapio's) that you could not learn from visually examining a swing using slow motion video?
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jan 5, 2013 8:48:40 GMT -5
The same principles why you like video for biomechanical movement apply to information generated by 3D machines. You cannot effectively determine rotation rates on video. The axis keeps changing to determine a rate. You can guess from video, but it's still a guess. Tapio's machine isn't available for purchase. Like all forms of technology, they're a tool. Some people can use them effectively and others can't. I still prefer Trackman for my needs. It's not realistic that my swing is going to have big changes. I just need timing tweaks.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 5, 2013 10:41:08 GMT -5
cwdlaw223,
How do precise measurements of rotation rates (made by a 3-D machine) allow you to understand golf swing biomechanics/mechanics better? You have still not given one example of where you learned something very useful about golf swing mechanics/biomechanics from a 3-D machine - that I couldn't learn from watching videos using a swing analyser program.
You also stated-: "The axis keeps changing to determine a rate."
That problem-issue actually applies to 3-D machines, and not video because one doesn't try to measure rotation rates using video. 3-D machine operators cannot even agree on the "correct" axis of measurement when it comes to body parts (eg. left arm, left hand) and they certainly don't agree on how to determine if that axis-of-measurement is changing at different time points during the swing. Tapio's graphs look nothing like the TPI graphs, and I find them both of no practical use.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by tomdavis76 on Jan 5, 2013 11:37:53 GMT -5
Poor cw, just parroting Manzella...
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jan 5, 2013 15:16:44 GMT -5
And I still keep breaking 70 there Jeffy. Nothing poor or short about my game. How about you? Have you broken 80 in the past three years?
|
|