|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Aug 11, 2019 8:35:06 GMT -5
Dr Mann
I noticed that the 'Swing Engineer' has written a new book called 'The Golf Enchiridion: The Complete Golfing Guide'.
Always wondered who he was and now I know : Antony Taggart (Authorized Instructor of The Golfing Machine and creator of TheSwingEngineer.com)
I don't think his book will be as detailed as your own website but might be worth reading.
DG
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Aug 11, 2019 21:06:15 GMT -5
Dr Mann I noticed that the 'Swing Engineer' has written a new book called 'The Golf Enchiridion: The Complete Golfing Guide'. Always wondered who he was and now I know : Antony Taggart (Authorized Instructor of The Golfing Machine and creator of TheSwingEngineer.com) I don't think his book will be as detailed as your own website but might be worth reading. DG Thanks for letting me know about the publication of that book. I will purchase the Kindle edition and let you know what I think of his book in the near future. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Aug 12, 2019 12:10:12 GMT -5
Dr Mann I noticed that the 'Swing Engineer' has written a new book called 'The Golf Enchiridion: The Complete Golfing Guide'. Always wondered who he was and now I know : Antony Taggart (Authorized Instructor of The Golfing Machine and creator of TheSwingEngineer.com) I don't think his book will be as detailed as your own website but might be worth reading. DG I have read his book and I think that it is one of the most worthless golf instructional books recently published. I disagree with many of his opinions (especially related to his "belief" that hinging actions must be operant during the time period of ball-clubface contact), but I especially disagree with the overall utility of his golf instructional approach. He has a section of the book related to biomechanics (body parts) where he simply lists the way each body part can move in terms of joint motions. He provides no practical advice on how each body part should be moved during a full golf swing action. I may be tempted to provide some examples where his golf instructional approach makes zero sense! Addendum added later: I discovered to my surprise, and delight, that it is possible to get a refund on a Kindle book purchase if one is not satisfied with the book. I cancelled my purchase (after quickly reading the book) and I expect to be fully refunded for the purchase. I would certainly not recommend that any serious golfer spend ~$45 to purchase his book. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Aug 12, 2019 22:14:29 GMT -5
Here is one example of Anthony Taggart's irrational opinions expressed in his book. AT states that hinging actions are happening when the ball is in contact with the clubface and that it will affect the ball flight pattern. So, for example, if one uses a horizontal hinging action where the clubface closes continuously through impact it will result in a straight ball flight if the clubface is slightly open to the clubhead path at the time of first ball-clubface contact, but square at the time of ball-clubface separation. However, if the clubface is square to the clubhead path path at the time of first clubface-ball contact, it will result in a ball flight to the left because the clubface will be closed to the clubhead path at the time of ball-clubface separation. Think about his wild claim! How can a skilled golfer get the timing so perfectly timed that he can guarantee that the clubface is slightly open to the clubhead path just prior to ball-clubface contact by the requisite amount - so that it will then be square at the time of ball-clubface separation (which happens ~3/4" later along the clubhead path)? I believe that it is impossible to achieve that goal on a consistent basis, and I believe that skilled pro golfers get their clubface square to the clubhead path a few inches before impact and that the clubface remains square through impact. Here are two video examples. Adam Scott's drive swing.
AT also states that a golfer must prepare for his desired hinging pattern well before impact by controlling his clubface relative to his clubhead path, and he states that if a golfer intends to use a horizontal hinging action through impact, then he must already have the clubface square to the clubhead path by P6. He then states that "evidence" of that correct square clubface achievement is the "fact" that the toe of the club will be pointing straight-up at P6. That's crazy!!! If the toe of the club is pointing straight-up at P6, then it means that the clubface is still wide-open to the clubhead path at P6 (presuming a neutral left hand grip where the back of the left hand is vertical at P6 and where the clubface is straight-in-line with the back of the left hand [GFLW]). Then, the clubface will close between P6 and impact due to a PA#3 release action (which is due to left forearm supination). However, AT also states that a HH action must happen biomechanically due to external rotation of the left arm at the level of the left shoulder socket. How can that biomechanical phenomenon happen well before impact - as AT implies?
AT also states that the purpose of a vertical hinging action is to vary the ball flight pattern from a height perspective, so that it could be used to hit the ball higher than normal, but still straight. He also states that the biomechanical action of vertical hinging happens due to an clockwise rotation of the left humerus in the left shoulder socket (= reverse roll) and that it must start to happen well before impact. Think carefully about that scenario! To hit the ball straight, one needs to perfect the release of PA#3 (which is due to a left forearm supinatory action) during the P6.5 => impact time period so that the clubface can be square to the target at impact. Then, to hit the ball higher, AT states that one must already be preparing to rotate the left humerus clockwise during the P6.5 => impact time period. How do you envisage performing both of those biomechanical actions at the same time with the requisite amount of perfect timing to consistently ensure that you have a straight ball flight that simultaneously has a higher trajectory?
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Aug 13, 2019 5:06:49 GMT -5
Many thanks for that book review Dr Mann
DG
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Feb 21, 2021 12:28:11 GMT -5
A flawed you-tube video (imho) from the Swing Engineer, considering there is forward shaft bend approaching impact in virtually all pro golfers 5-iron-driver swings.
Also, why would a shaft without any 'lag' cushion the clubhead/ball impact?
DG
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 21, 2021 12:53:47 GMT -5
DG, I agree with you. I think that the SE (like Bertie Cordle) has it wrong. We know that the peripheral clubshaft is not bent back when approaching impact (which the SE states must be happening for a golfer to strike the ball solidly). It is also a fallacy to believe that the clubhead must be accelerating at impact in order to execute a solid strike and maximize clubhead speed. I noted that you made the following comment in his comment section-: " Only extremely strong players might be able to create 'lag' into impact".
If a golfer uses a TGM swinging technique for his driver swing, where the release of PA#2 is due to the MoF existing between P5.5 => P7, then I think that it is impossible to create lag into impact no matter how strong the golfer is from a muscular perspective. Could a very strong golfer perform a "punch shot" action - using an active release of PA#1 in a TGM hitting manner, and where a positive torque is maintained all the way to impact - for a driver swing action in order to drive the ball >300 yards? I doubt that it is possible, and I have never personally seen a swing video of that driver swing action (where the peripheral clubshaft would be bent backwards just prior to impact)! Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Feb 21, 2021 13:19:02 GMT -5
Dr Mann
Yes, I made that you-tube comment based on what I read on DT's website and I suspect there aren't any pro golfers capable to produce lag bend at impact for long clubs.
------------------------------------------------------------- Tom Wishon has been the Chief Technical Officer of Golfsmith, and now has his own golf club component company. His company is recognized as an innovator, and he is the world's foremost advocate of custom fitted golf clubs. In his book "Common Sense Clubfitting" (chapter five on shaft fitting), he writes: "The condition of the shaft being slightly bent backward with the head lagging behind the shaft is very rare in the game. This is because the swing skill plus strength that is required to maintain radial acceleration and the wrist-cock angle until very late in the downswing is such that very, very, VERY few golfers can do this. Far more common are the conditions in which the shaft arrives at impact either straight or slightly bent/curved forward with the head in front of the forward curve of the shaft."
In other words, it takes more athletic ability than almost anybody possesses to apply a positive wrist torque late enough in the swing to be helpful. (If I may add my own opinion, not Wishon's words: It isn't just strength; it's also speed. Late in the swing, centrifugal force is whipping the clubhead toward impact. The wrist-cock angle is being dragged out very fast, so it takes a lot of hand speed to even keep up, much less help it along.)"
-------------------------------------------------------------
DG
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 21, 2021 13:36:44 GMT -5
DG, You wrote-: "In other words, it takes more athletic ability than almost anybody possesses to apply a positive wrist torque late enough in the swing to be helpful. (If I may add my own opinion, not Wishon's words: It isn't just strength; it's also speed. Late in the swing, centrifugal force is whipping the clubhead toward impact. The wrist-cock angle is being dragged out very fast, so it takes a lot of hand speed to even keep up, much less help it along.)"
Regarding the bold-highlighted statement, I can think of expressing it differently.
Consider the following Dr. Kwon diagram.
What is causing the fast release of PA#2 in the later downswing in a TGM swinging action?
Surely it is the club torque being generated by the MoF. The magnitude of the MoF and its direction of action is represented by the black arrow, and it is mainly tangential at P6 and mainly centripetal by P7. So, it is the increasing centripetal direction of the MoF, combined with its magnitude, that causes the clubhead to whip towards impact in the later downswing.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 21, 2021 14:16:17 GMT -5
Here is another interesting video by Lynn Blake.
Watch the video between the 30 - 60 seconds time points.
Note that LB creates a scenario where the peripheral shaft is bent forward, and he states that it happens because the shaft cannot keep up with the lag pressure force being exerted at the level of the club handle. That claim makes no sense to me!!!
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 21, 2021 14:35:40 GMT -5
Here is another interesting video at the Taly Mindset website. www.taly.com/hitit300yards.htmlTaly has the idea that swing power is generated by creating shaft flex and he uses the Taly tool to train that type of swing action. Note that there is a slow motion swing video featured where he is hitting a wedge about 80 yards. Note that the peripheral shaft is bent forward just before impact, even though he believes that he is maintaining shaft flex (lag) all the way into impact. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Feb 21, 2021 17:29:30 GMT -5
DG, You wrote-: "In other words, it takes more athletic ability than almost anybody possesses to apply a positive wrist torque late enough in the swing to be helpful. (If I may add my own opinion, not Wishon's words: It isn't just strength; it's also speed. Late in the swing, centrifugal force is whipping the clubhead toward impact. The wrist-cock angle is being dragged out very fast, so it takes a lot of hand speed to even keep up, much less help it along.)"
Regarding the bold-highlighted statement, I can think of expressing it differently.
Consider the following Dr. Kwon diagram.
What is causing the fast release of PA#2 in the later downswing in a TGM swinging action?
Surely it is the club torque being generated by the MoF. The magnitude of the MoF and its direction of action is represented by the black arrow, and it is mainly tangential at P6 and mainly centripetal by P7. So, it is the increasing centripetal direction of the MoF, combined with its magnitude, that causes the clubhead to whip towards impact in the later downswing.
Jeff.
Dr Mann Yes you are correct , it's not 'Centrifugal Force ' and I think using the term can be a cause of confusion, especially when one is trying to understand the true physics of the swing. The black arrow represents the direction and magnitude of the 'Net Mid-Hand Force' . DG
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Feb 22, 2021 11:29:19 GMT -5
Just thought I'd highlight an obvious error in DT's 'pragmatic' explanation that a 'centrifugal force' is the cause of release. To be fair, he does admit that it is a cause for controversy but uses the term to try and explain release to a beginner in physics and he also says " it is much easier for the non-physicist, non-engineer reader to understand". Here is DT's original diagram and his comments below: "It turns out that the torque the body applies to the triangle is considerable, but a good swing applies almost no torque to the grip of the clubs by the hands. Yet more than half of the clubhead speed comes from the club turning about the hands at the bottom of the swing -- much more than could be explained simply by shoulder turn. What is creating that very strong rotation of the club about the hands, if the hands are not being used to supply a "hit" force?" The answer is centrifugal force. Remember that a body in motion wants to keep moving in a straight line. But the golfer is pulling the club around in a circle. According to Newton, the club wants to fly outward from the circle; the force that is trying to pull it out straight with the arms is centrifugal force. That centrifugal force is generated by pulling the club in a circle around the shoulder hinge, and the force wants to pull the club straight out along a radius from that hinge." One can see there is an obvious error because the only real force that can be applied to the clubhead (if there is no torque happening at the wrist joint) in the above model is via a pulling tension in the shaft . How can that pulling tension force in the shaft produce a force in the direction of a claimed 'Centrifugal Force' red arrow in the diagram above? DG
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 22, 2021 11:49:03 GMT -5
Just thought I'd highlight an obvious error in DT's 'pragmatic' explanation that a 'centrifugal force' is the cause of release. To be fair, he does admit that it is a cause for controversy but uses the term to try and explain release to a beginner in physics and he also says " it is much easier for the non-physicist, non-engineer reader to understand". Here is DT's original diagram and his comments below: "It turns out that the torque the body applies to the triangle is considerable, but a good swing applies almost no torque to the grip of the clubs by the hands. Yet more than half of the clubhead speed comes from the club turning about the hands at the bottom of the swing -- much more than could be explained simply by shoulder turn. What is creating that very strong rotation of the club about the hands, if the hands are not being used to supply a "hit" force?" The answer is centrifugal force. Remember that a body in motion wants to keep moving in a straight line. But the golfer is pulling the club around in a circle. According to Newton, the club wants to fly outward from the circle; the force that is trying to pull it out straight with the arms is centrifugal force. That centrifugal force is generated by pulling the club in a circle around the shoulder hinge, and the force wants to pull the club straight out along a radius from that hinge." One can see there is an obvious error because the only real force that can be applied to the clubhead (if there is no torque happening at the wrist joint) in the above model is via a pulling tension in the shaft . How can that pulling tension force in the shaft produce a force in the direction of a claimed 'Centrifugal Force' red arrow in the diagram above? DG A force in the direction of the red arrow is produced if the left hand's pulling force (net mid-hand force) does not pass through the COM of the clubshaft, which will happen if the hand arc path is circular and if the centripetal component of the MoF gets larger. That is the basis for the D'Alembert principle. However, I no longer believe in the legitimacy of the D'Alembert principle for a driver swing because there is not a strong correlation between the timing of the start of the release of PA#2 and the magnitude of the MoF during the P5.2 - P5.5 time period. Jeff.
|
|