|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 11, 2012 13:04:57 GMT -5
nmg, You wrote-: "Torque is NOT a force! repeat TORQUE IS NOT A FORCE.... Tuttelman peddles some junk science. Rod White gets those results because they are based on a badly flawed model i.e the double pendulum. The CONTRACTING SPIRAL hand path which you think is a: "figment of my (nmgolfer's) imagination" makes it possible to add torque and increase chs at impact. Only girlyman golfers use the passive "swingers" release." I am not implying that torque is a force. I am implying that torque is force x distance. Look at this DT article. www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/leecommotion1.phpThis is how he defines torque-: "A torque is a push-pull pair of forces, separated by some distance. In the picture, the right arm push and left arm pull are separated by the width of the shoulders. Either or both (right arm push and/or left arm pull) can be used to transmit the torque." Do you disagree? Also, do you believe that this DT modification where he refers to a "curved track" is also invalid? www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/doublependulum.phpAnd do you think that these calculations are also invalid? www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/handhit.phpJeff.
|
|
|
Post by natep on Jan 11, 2012 13:37:16 GMT -5
Nmg is correct, IMO. Pingman has unlimited "pivot" power to make up for the free, passive hinges at the "wrist". Remember also that Sasho Mackenzie had to use double the normal human shoulder strength in his one armed model to replicate the clubhead speed of a real golfer due to lack of a right arm. Regarding the spiral, just look at the handpath in the Miura diagram (a) and you can see it resembles a fibonacci spiral IMO.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 11, 2012 14:06:11 GMT -5
Natep, I agree that a two-armed golfer can hit the ball further than a one-armed golfer. However, I prefer DT's reasoning. See - www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/leecommotion1.phpHe argues (persuasively in my opinion) that you can use the shoulder torque (which is actually the pivot torque) to speed up the release of PA#4 in the early-mid downswing via the short-levered right arm. In other words, if one keeps the power package intact between P4 and P6, then one can release PA#4 more powerfully and speed up hand speed along the hand arc path by including the right arm. Then the club will release automatically according to Vclubhead = Vhands + Vrel - without interference from a positive wrist torque that causes a decrease in clubhead speed and an early pre-impact peaking of clubhead speed (as shown in this next graph). BM's RACP-release technique encourages i) earlier opening up of the power package (earlier straightening of the right arm) which will decrease hand speed and ii) applying a positive wrist torque that will also produce a decrease in clubhead speed. So, there are two models to explain why adding a right arm increases clubhead speed. 1) Increased hand speed (due to better application of pivot power to the hands via a retained power package) + automatic/passive release of PA#2 via the Vclubhead=V ands+V rel principle. 2) Premature right arm straightening + applying a positive torque around the coupling point. Which explanation do you prefer, and why? Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by natep on Jan 11, 2012 14:15:36 GMT -5
If Tutelman says that any right hand torque applied anywhere on the downswing slows the clubhead down then I disagree with him 100%.
|
|
|
Post by nmgolfer on Jan 11, 2012 14:16:07 GMT -5
nmg, You wrote-: "Torque is NOT a force! repeat TORQUE IS NOT A FORCE.... Tuttelman peddles some junk science. Rod White gets those results because they are based on a badly flawed model i.e the double pendulum. The CONTRACTING SPIRAL hand path which you think is a: "figment of my (nmgolfer's) imagination" makes it possible to add torque and increase chs at impact. Only girlyman golfers use the passive "swingers" release." I am not implying that torque is a force. I am implying that torque is force x distance. Look at this DT article. www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/leecommotion1.phpThis is how he defines torque-: "A torque is a push-pull pair of forces, separated by some distance. In the picture, the right arm push and left arm pull are separated by the width of the shoulders. Either or both (right arm push and/or left arm pull) can be used to transmit the torque." Do you disagree? The torque defn. is ok but most of whats written here is Junk science........... Junk science........... Junk....... I believe Tuttleman is an electrical engineer and it shows. Those are headache inducing write-ups. I see now where you get some of your wacky ideas but its a free world you get to decide who and what to believe. To each his own.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 11, 2012 14:19:34 GMT -5
nmg wrote-: "its a free world you get to decide who and what to believe. To each his own."
I fully agree!
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by gmbtempe on Jan 11, 2012 14:20:08 GMT -5
I have seen enough of NM's writing and calculations to believe if he says its junk, its junk.
Not that Jeff will accept that but for me its good enough.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 11, 2012 14:21:00 GMT -5
Natep,
You wrote-: "If Tutelman says that any right hand torque applied anywhere on the downswing slows the clubhead down then I disagree with him 100%."
Could you please explain your reasoning?
Thanks.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 11, 2012 14:22:43 GMT -5
Natep, You wrote-: "Regarding the spiral, just look at the handpath in the Miura diagram (a) and you can see it resembles a fibonacci spiral IMO." It may look a F-spiral if one plots the hand path of Alexis Thompson's swing, but it will not look like a F-spiral if one plots the hand arc path of John Erickson's swing. Here is a plot of JE's hand arc path Note that JE has a bent left knee and only a small positive O factor at impact, and his left shoulder does not move up-and-away as much as Alexis Thompson's left shoulder. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 11, 2012 14:26:16 GMT -5
Greg,
You wrote-: "I have seen enough of NM's writing and calculations to believe if he says its junk, its junk.
Not that Jeff will accept that but for me its good enough."
Have you seen enough of David Tutelman's writings to say that it is junk, or are you simply not making independent judgements (within the limits of your personal capacity) to understand what he has written?
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by natep on Jan 11, 2012 14:45:52 GMT -5
I didnt read that whole page you linked due to time constraints at the moment, but I'll tell you this: I had an email conversation with Lee Comeaux a couple of years ago and he told repeatedly that he grips the club as tight as he can and hits with the right arm as hard as he can, so I'm not sure what the hell Tutelman's reasoning is there if he says any torque slows down the clubhead, as Comeaux told me he gets maximum speed with his method.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 11, 2012 15:11:58 GMT -5
Natep, You wrote-: "I had an email conversation with Lee Comeaux a couple of years ago and he told repeatedly that he grips the club as tight as he can and hits with the right arm as hard as he can, so I'm not sure what the hell Tutelman's reasoning is there if he says any torque slows down the clubhead, as Comeaux told me he gets maximum speed with his method." I do not dispute that LC gets maximum speed with his method. But how does it work? DT is friends with LC, and I believe that LC accepts DT's analysis of the physics of his right arm swing action. See - www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/handhit.phpNote that the clubshaft has lead deflection in the late downswing - even accounting for focal plane shutter distortions that DT discusses in his focal plane distortion article. How is that possible if positive wrist torque is being applied? www.tutelman.com/golf/measure/focalPlaneDistortion.phpAlso, look at this accompanying video to show the maximum human speed of right hand-induced uncocking of the left wrist. www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/rightside/batonTwirl.wmvAlso, on what basis do you dispute this DT article - that calculates the effect of positive wrist torque on clubhead speed? www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/handhit.phpJeff.
|
|
|
Post by natep on Jan 11, 2012 15:57:24 GMT -5
www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/handhit.phpI'm not even a huge science guy, but during my brief skimming of the paper I believe it contains errors. That being said, I still dont understand your point. In the summary of the paper linked above he admits that a positive wrist torque increased clubhead speed in his double pendulum model, and that others have had similar findings. He mentions that it needs to be applied starting at about 70msecs before impact. If you look at those three pendulums in the middle of the page he shows where 60msecs pre impact is. Its basically the same place Nesbit described.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Jan 11, 2012 18:50:33 GMT -5
It is only ~1.5% difference in clubhead speed for a positive torque applied at 70mseccs, but then he states-: "First clubhead speed: There's perhaps a couple of miles per hour of clubhead speed to be gained. That translates into no more than five extra yards -- certainly not enough to explain the 30-yard gains Rock reports. Not only is the gain pretty small, but the slap has to be timed very precisely! If you start the slap 40msec earlier than you should, you lose the whole gain and then some." I hope that you realize that he is talking about a right wrist slap action near impact, and not a right arm straightening action which applies torque much earlier, and then this graph applies. Positive wrist torque decreases clubhead speed and causes maximum speed to be reached earlier (pre-impact). What are the errors that you have identified? Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by natep on Jan 11, 2012 19:27:54 GMT -5
The clubhead with the red dot on it represents 60msecs pre impact. He says the torque has to begin being applied before this time, so if thats what you want to call just a "right hand slap just before impact" then so be it. I havent had time to go through those papers thoroughly, but I did see them mention that MOST golfers are decelerating the club into impact. Tapio has told me that that is virtually impossible, than even total hackers clubheads accel into impact. He said you'd basically have to be trying to do that on purpose for it to happen. I think there's other stuff wrong too but I'll have to get to it all later.
|
|