|
Post by chipitin on Sept 20, 2013 1:16:21 GMT -5
Tom says:
Jeff-
Duh. Everyone who spent five seconds thinking about it knows that "early supination" did not mean "100% supination". The fantasy was your implication that "late supination" was somehow an option. Everyone has "late supination", even DJ and Tommy Gainey. Geez.
Geez Tom how does that work for closed to open then? Seems like a contradiction in application!
Closed to open is a myth just like the tooth fairy...nice thought but it ain't true.
The golfer at a certain point can't do anything to alter what's happening basically they are de-coupled from the clubhead and nothing they could do at the grip end even if they could try would change a thing.
|
|
|
Post by tomdavis76 on Sept 20, 2013 7:49:13 GMT -5
Jeff-
External rotation of the left shoulder closes the clubface and external rotation of the right shoulder opens the clubface. How can it be otherwise?
Jeff
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Sept 20, 2013 11:03:16 GMT -5
Jeffy,
You wrote-: "External rotation of the left shoulder closes the clubface and external rotation of the right shoulder opens the clubface. How can it be otherwise?"
I have repeatedly given examples of how you/KM have such a simplistic understanding of golf swing biomechanics, that you get many things wrong.
External rotation of the right humerus would open the face if both arms were equally straight, but that biomechanical phenomenon only happens post-impact, and not pre-impact.
The reason why you are getting this issue wrong is that you don't understand the functioning of the LAFW and RFFW in the early-mid downswing. As you know, external rotation of the right humerus happens between P4 and P6 when the power package is intact and the LAFW is lying against the surface of the inclined plane. During that time period, the right elbow is bent roughly ~90 degrees and the RFFW is aligned roughly perpendicular to the LAFW. If the right humerus becomes more externally rotated during that time period, it can cause the entire LAFW to shallow-out to a shallower inclined plane. However, it doesn't alter the internal alignment of the LAFW and the clubface will still be roughly parallel to the back of the GFLW and left lower forearm. In other words, the clubface's alignment relative to the anatomical structures that constitute the intact LAFW (left arm/forearm, GFLW, clubshaft) does not change. If the clubshaft shallows-out (flattens-out to a shallower inclined plane) the clubface's alignment relative to that shallower inclined plane isn't altered, and the clubface doesn't become more open to the "new" shallower inclined plane. This shallowing-out of the intact LAFW to a shallower plane is the opposite of BM's tumble action, and one could call it a reverse-tumble action. In both a tumble action, or reverse-tumble action, the clubshaft changes its angle relative to the ground, but the clubface does not change its alignment to the clubshaft plane (which is simply reoriented in space).
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by tomdavis76 on Sept 20, 2013 11:10:57 GMT -5
Jeff-
The reason you keep getting this wrong is you don't understand geometry.
Jeff
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Sept 20, 2013 22:26:27 GMT -5
Jeffy,
You have resorted to your usual tactic when stymied - you make vague general claims without any explanatory content.
You have also, as per usual, selectively ignored many of my personal counterarguments because you do not seemingly have a solid basis for formulating a rational counter-argument.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Sept 20, 2013 23:11:42 GMT -5
Jeffy posted this photo of Tiger Woods at the P9 position. s223.photobucket.com/user/jeffy10028/media/New%20album/ScreenShot2013-09-18at82842PM_zps152dea13.png.htmlHe then stated-: " In fact, at his ballstriking peak (early 2000s), Tiger cupped the left wrist and pronated the left forearm in the follow-through just like Hogan. And his stock shot was a fade; in fact, I have heard that he had a hard time hitting a draw during that period." It is beyond my understanding how Jeffy can label that a "followthrough" swing action when it is happening well beyond the end of the followthrough (which ends when both arms are straight at roughly the P7.2 position). That is part of the finish action and it has no necessary casual relevance to the hand release action utilized by a golfer through the impact zone. Also, the left forearm is not pronated - it is neutral. What happens after impact is that the left forearm doesn't necessarily continue to supinate and all further counterclockwise rotation of the left arm only occurs at left shoulder socket level. To get the shaft on-plane at the P8.5-9 position (where the butt end of the club points at the ball-target line), the left wrist will have to dorsiflex if the left forearm doesn't supinate. By contrast, some golfers allow their left forearm to supinate during their finish swivel action, and that allows the golfer to maintain a FLW during that finish swivel action phase of the swing. Note that Kellie Oride has a FLW in image 3 - and that is only biomechanically possible because she allowed her left forearm to supinate. Tiger Woods often uses the same finish swivel action technique in his short iron swings. Note that TW has a FLW in image 3 because he allowed his left forearm to supinate a lot during his finish swivel action. The fact that Tiger Woods uses a lot of left forearm supination during his finish swivel action doesn't mean that he was hitting a draw rather than a fade. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by tomdavis76 on Sept 21, 2013 19:08:30 GMT -5
Jeffy, You have resorted to your usual tactic when stymied - you make vague general claims without any explanatory content. You have also, as per usual, selectively ignored many of my personal counterarguments because you do not seemingly have a solid basis for formulating a rational counter-argument. Jeff. Jeff- I'm not stymied, you are. Geometry is geometry. There are no "counter-arguments". Jeff
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Sept 21, 2013 19:24:33 GMT -5
Jeffy wrote-: "I'm not stymied, you are. Geometry is geometry. There are no "counter-arguments"."
LOL.
Only the Pope-of-the-Golf World (or a fool) would have the audacity to assert that his personal perspective on the geometry of the golf swing must be correct, and that there is no possibility of a different personal perspective on the geometry of the golf swing - especially when he has not even clearly explained what's his personal perspective.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by konrad on Oct 8, 2013 12:58:17 GMT -5
Only the Pope-of-the-Golf World (or a fool) would have the audacity to assert that his personal perspective on the geometry of the golf swing must be correct, and that there is no possibility of a different personal perspective on the geometry of the golf swing - especially when he has not even clearly explained what's his personal perspective. Jeff. I'm curious, couldn't your impudence for Jeffy's perspective be just as erroneous and close-minded as you think his is for yours? How is your obsession with an intact LAFW/FLW as CORRECT biomechanics/mechanics be any different? Jeffy is right about wrist movements because they are clearly defined (UD, RD, PF, DF). To assert that Kelli Oride is maintaining her lead wrist position during her swing is just as preposterous as anything Jeffy has said IMO. Maybe you should take another look at what is really going on with her lead wrist during her swing.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Oct 8, 2013 16:52:55 GMT -5
Konrad,
Of course I could be wrong about many issues relating to golf swing biomechanics/mechanics. That's why I welcome vigorous debate and counterarguments. How about showing me that I am wrong about Kellie Oride maintaining an intact LAFW/GFLW throughout her downswing and followthrough?
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by konrad on Oct 8, 2013 18:00:07 GMT -5
How about showing me that I am wrong about Kellie Oride maintaining an intact LAFW/GFLW throughout her downswing and followthrough? Already did in the other forum.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Oct 8, 2013 19:07:17 GMT -5
Where did you show that I am wrong? In that other thread, you are only implying that I am wrong - but the word "implying" isn't the same as proof. Now, the real question is who really manifests close-minded arrogance!
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by konrad on Oct 8, 2013 19:44:56 GMT -5
I'm not trying to be arrogant, you may be at times, but, not me, I'm not like that and I don't have to "one-up" anyone. You want to believe Kelli is maintaining her lead wrist position all the way through the swing that's your prerogative. I don't think you have conclusively PROVED your belief about Oride's swing either. Ask kelvin if he'll take another Phantom video of Kelli's swing from up the line and slightly behind so we can see what her lead wrist does in the follow-through to the finish.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Oct 8, 2013 21:05:37 GMT -5
Konrad,
You wrote-: "Ask kelvin if he'll take another Phantom video of Kelli's swing from up the line and slightly behind so we can see what her lead wrist does in the follow-through to the finish."
I agree that an "up-the-line and slightly behind" Phantom video would be very useful. I cannot imagine KM being responsive to any request from me - so why don't you or Jeffy make the request?
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by konrad on Oct 8, 2013 22:16:17 GMT -5
I agree that an "up-the-line and slightly behind" Phantom video would be very useful. I cannot imagine KM being responsive to any request from me - so why don't you or Jeffy make the request? I don't know Kelvin at all and I wouldn't even think of bothering him over something like this. I know what's going on with Kelli's swing and I'm perfectly content with my perception. Maybe Jeffy can comment on what Kelvin thinks Kelli is doing because he's the one that took the video and is working with her so he would know if her lead wrist in going into extension in the follow-through.
|
|