Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 25, 2013 23:59:30 GMT -5
See this SandTrap golf forum thread - thesandtrap.com/t/44717/is-there-a-5th-power-accumulator
David Wedzik brought up the idea of a 5th PA - which he believes is power derived from a straightening right wrist. Iacas endorsed this fallacious idea.
What is most interesting is the poor quality of their logical reasoning re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics.
In post #1, DW presents his case for the existence of a 5th PA as being due to right wrist straightening through impact. Where is his "evidence". First of all, he noticed that the degree of right wrist bend decreases in the late downswing and he therefore presumes that it should be a power source. However, he makes no attempt to prove that any right wrist straightening action is active (rather than passive). Secondly, he uses as a sport analogy the fact that the right wrist straightens in other sports eg. baseball pitcher throwing a baseball. However, in baseball pitching there is only one arm involved and secondly there is no intermediate implement involved between the throwing hand and the ball, while in a golf swing we use a golf club to strike the ball. DW would have to first show that any right wrist straightening action is active versus passive, and then he would have to show that it can either increase power by push-pressure being either applied at PP#1 (which is above the coupling point) or PP#3 (which is below the coupling point). He makes to attempt to deal with these issues.
The lack of insight exhibited by DW and Iacas is particularly apparent in many other posts.
In post #8, Iacas states-: "If you think about it, from a fully uncocked wrist #3 adds next to no power. It's enough to send the ball forward, what, two inches? And #2 adds no power in the direction of the target. Go ahead - cock your wrist and then uncock it. If you hit the ball at all, it's going to go off the bottom of the hosel and between your legs.".
It's a crazy argument. PA#3 provides swing power due to the roll of the club between P6.5 and P7 and the amount of swing power produced depends on the size of the accumulator #3 angle, which depends on the left hand grip pattern eg. finger grip versus mid-palmar grip. With a finger girp, there is large amount of travel of the clubhead due to the roll of PA#3. PA#3 release also occurs before the club reaches a straight line relationship between the left arm and it occurs between P6.5 and P7. How can he state that PA#2 doesn't provide power in the direction of the target - when it obviously does because PA#2 releases within the plane of the LAFW and the LAFW is directed towards the target through impact. This is most readily apparent when one considers a golfer with a very strong left hand grip - when the back of the FLW is always parallel to the surface of the inclined plane between P6 and P7.5, and where the left wrist uncocks in a plane that is parallel to the inclined plane between P6 and P7.5. Also, in another post Iacas states that the release of PA#2 can maybe propel the ball a few inches. What is he thinking? Is he thinking that PA#2 is due the active contraction of the left forearm muscles that ulnar deviate the left wrist? It's not - the release of PA#2 is due to the physics that underlie the law of the double pendulum (CF-release phenomenon) and it occurs between P5.5 and P7 in a golfer who uses a random release action. It's a major source of swing power in a swinger.
In post #20, DW states-: "You are correct that, so far, in our findings PA5 is "releasing" more as the right arm to rib cage pressure point is lost and the swing is more "CF That said, it is really happening more as the swing progresses from impact (P7) to follow through (P8). There is very little difference that I have seen at impact itself.".".
Here he is claiming that right wrist straightening (release of PA#5) is happening after impact between P7 and P8. In that scenario, it cannot possibly be producing any swing power because it happens after impact, and a PA can only produce swing power if it is unloaded pre-impact.
Iacas offers another suggestion for what represents the release of PA#5 in post #26 when he states that "The fifth accumulator is basically timed flipping". However, David Tutelman has analysed this scenario and he demonstrated that a golfer cannot increase clubhead speed significantly by flipping through impact - secondary to the addition of an active right wrist straightening action. In fact, I have demonstrated in the thread on "shaft stress" that the clubshaft has forward shaft bending between P6 and P7 due to the PA#2 club releasing phenomenon that occurs in a swinger who uses a random release action, and positive wrist torque cannot exist under those conditions.
Iacas gets totally irrational in post #29 when he states-: "The simple truth is that the best players in the world change their right wrist angle throughout the backswing, downswing, and past impact. Doing so can create speed and add power. We called it the "fifth accumulator" because it's "kind of" right there with #2 and #3. It may very well not be an accumulator in the TGM sense. We're okay with that."
Note his flawed reasoning. The right wrist may straighten to a small degree pre-impact, but how does he "automatically" know that it can increase speed and power. He is obliged to show that it is possible for an active right wrist straightening action to increase swing power, and he cannot simply make a wild claim. Secondly, if it could really increase swing power then it would qualify as a PA in a TGM-sense.
In post #42, Iacas makes the same wild claim without any "evidentiary support" when he states-: "I think the key point is that the left wrist (for a righty) is flat at impact and if the right wrist is changing its angle, that's a way to add speed to the clubhead. The left wrist might roll, it might cup slightly, it might do both, but if the right wrist is straightening or "being thrown" as we called it, you can add power. Timing it is another thing, but the game's best do it".
He is again claiming that pro-flipping is a source of swing power - but he provides no "evidence" to support that claim.
Iacas is completely irrational in post #43 when he states that he can increase clubhead speed by 13% by actively straightening the right wrist through impact - when swinging with the right arm alone. That's meaningless - because one has to show that the same active right wrist straightening action can increase clubhead speed when the left hand is pulling the club through impact. As I previously explained, he would have to show that it can increase swing power by the application of push-pressure above the coupling point (at PP#1) or below the coupling point (via PP#3). He has never even made an attempt to provide a rational explanation to show that this is possible. In the accompanying photos he posted in that post, he shows a golfer with an intact LAFW at P7.2 - and he claims that the associated right wrist straightening action is obviously increasing CH speed.
How can it be increasing CH speed when there is no flipping through impact - considering that he previously claimed that PA#5 release was equivalent to "timed flipping"?
I am not really interested in their wild claims about PA#5 - I am simply amazed at the poor quality, and inconsistency, of their reasoning, when it comes to the subject of golf swing mechanics/biomechanics.
Jeff.
David Wedzik brought up the idea of a 5th PA - which he believes is power derived from a straightening right wrist. Iacas endorsed this fallacious idea.
What is most interesting is the poor quality of their logical reasoning re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics.
In post #1, DW presents his case for the existence of a 5th PA as being due to right wrist straightening through impact. Where is his "evidence". First of all, he noticed that the degree of right wrist bend decreases in the late downswing and he therefore presumes that it should be a power source. However, he makes no attempt to prove that any right wrist straightening action is active (rather than passive). Secondly, he uses as a sport analogy the fact that the right wrist straightens in other sports eg. baseball pitcher throwing a baseball. However, in baseball pitching there is only one arm involved and secondly there is no intermediate implement involved between the throwing hand and the ball, while in a golf swing we use a golf club to strike the ball. DW would have to first show that any right wrist straightening action is active versus passive, and then he would have to show that it can either increase power by push-pressure being either applied at PP#1 (which is above the coupling point) or PP#3 (which is below the coupling point). He makes to attempt to deal with these issues.
The lack of insight exhibited by DW and Iacas is particularly apparent in many other posts.
In post #8, Iacas states-: "If you think about it, from a fully uncocked wrist #3 adds next to no power. It's enough to send the ball forward, what, two inches? And #2 adds no power in the direction of the target. Go ahead - cock your wrist and then uncock it. If you hit the ball at all, it's going to go off the bottom of the hosel and between your legs.".
It's a crazy argument. PA#3 provides swing power due to the roll of the club between P6.5 and P7 and the amount of swing power produced depends on the size of the accumulator #3 angle, which depends on the left hand grip pattern eg. finger grip versus mid-palmar grip. With a finger girp, there is large amount of travel of the clubhead due to the roll of PA#3. PA#3 release also occurs before the club reaches a straight line relationship between the left arm and it occurs between P6.5 and P7. How can he state that PA#2 doesn't provide power in the direction of the target - when it obviously does because PA#2 releases within the plane of the LAFW and the LAFW is directed towards the target through impact. This is most readily apparent when one considers a golfer with a very strong left hand grip - when the back of the FLW is always parallel to the surface of the inclined plane between P6 and P7.5, and where the left wrist uncocks in a plane that is parallel to the inclined plane between P6 and P7.5. Also, in another post Iacas states that the release of PA#2 can maybe propel the ball a few inches. What is he thinking? Is he thinking that PA#2 is due the active contraction of the left forearm muscles that ulnar deviate the left wrist? It's not - the release of PA#2 is due to the physics that underlie the law of the double pendulum (CF-release phenomenon) and it occurs between P5.5 and P7 in a golfer who uses a random release action. It's a major source of swing power in a swinger.
In post #20, DW states-: "You are correct that, so far, in our findings PA5 is "releasing" more as the right arm to rib cage pressure point is lost and the swing is more "CF That said, it is really happening more as the swing progresses from impact (P7) to follow through (P8). There is very little difference that I have seen at impact itself.".".
Here he is claiming that right wrist straightening (release of PA#5) is happening after impact between P7 and P8. In that scenario, it cannot possibly be producing any swing power because it happens after impact, and a PA can only produce swing power if it is unloaded pre-impact.
Iacas offers another suggestion for what represents the release of PA#5 in post #26 when he states that "The fifth accumulator is basically timed flipping". However, David Tutelman has analysed this scenario and he demonstrated that a golfer cannot increase clubhead speed significantly by flipping through impact - secondary to the addition of an active right wrist straightening action. In fact, I have demonstrated in the thread on "shaft stress" that the clubshaft has forward shaft bending between P6 and P7 due to the PA#2 club releasing phenomenon that occurs in a swinger who uses a random release action, and positive wrist torque cannot exist under those conditions.
Iacas gets totally irrational in post #29 when he states-: "The simple truth is that the best players in the world change their right wrist angle throughout the backswing, downswing, and past impact. Doing so can create speed and add power. We called it the "fifth accumulator" because it's "kind of" right there with #2 and #3. It may very well not be an accumulator in the TGM sense. We're okay with that."
Note his flawed reasoning. The right wrist may straighten to a small degree pre-impact, but how does he "automatically" know that it can increase speed and power. He is obliged to show that it is possible for an active right wrist straightening action to increase swing power, and he cannot simply make a wild claim. Secondly, if it could really increase swing power then it would qualify as a PA in a TGM-sense.
In post #42, Iacas makes the same wild claim without any "evidentiary support" when he states-: "I think the key point is that the left wrist (for a righty) is flat at impact and if the right wrist is changing its angle, that's a way to add speed to the clubhead. The left wrist might roll, it might cup slightly, it might do both, but if the right wrist is straightening or "being thrown" as we called it, you can add power. Timing it is another thing, but the game's best do it".
He is again claiming that pro-flipping is a source of swing power - but he provides no "evidence" to support that claim.
Iacas is completely irrational in post #43 when he states that he can increase clubhead speed by 13% by actively straightening the right wrist through impact - when swinging with the right arm alone. That's meaningless - because one has to show that the same active right wrist straightening action can increase clubhead speed when the left hand is pulling the club through impact. As I previously explained, he would have to show that it can increase swing power by the application of push-pressure above the coupling point (at PP#1) or below the coupling point (via PP#3). He has never even made an attempt to provide a rational explanation to show that this is possible. In the accompanying photos he posted in that post, he shows a golfer with an intact LAFW at P7.2 - and he claims that the associated right wrist straightening action is obviously increasing CH speed.
How can it be increasing CH speed when there is no flipping through impact - considering that he previously claimed that PA#5 release was equivalent to "timed flipping"?
I am not really interested in their wild claims about PA#5 - I am simply amazed at the poor quality, and inconsistency, of their reasoning, when it comes to the subject of golf swing mechanics/biomechanics.
Jeff.