|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Nov 14, 2019 13:51:04 GMT -5
Look at this video featuring Brendon DeVore and Mike Malaska. Mike Malaska is making the same claim that he always propounds and that is the claim that the clubface should be square to the clubhead arc by P6 and that one can then simply swing the clubshaft into impact without having to rotate the left forearm counterclockwise in a supinatory direction in the late downswing in order to square the clubface.
Brendon DeVore seemingly believes that wrongheaded claim.
Here are capture images from that video.
Image 1 shows Brendon at the P4 position. Note that he has a GFLW and that his clubface is roughly parallel to the back of his left hand (GFLW) because he uses a slightly strong-to-neutral left hand grip. Image 2 shows him at approximately the P5 position. Note that his left hand is descending down the plane with the back of his left hand parallel to his downswing's clubshaft's swingplane. Because the back of his GFLW is parallel to that downswing's swingplane, his clubface must also be parallel to that same plane, and he is not performing any biomechanical movement that will close the clubface relative to the clubhead arc between P4 and P6. To emphasize that golf instructional point, I have drawn a green line parallel to the back of his left hand (GFLW) in image 3 and it is parallel to his clubshaft's swingplane. Note that his clubface is parallel to that red line, and it is not squaring relative to his swingplane.
Here are capture images from a "real life" golf swing video when he was playing golf with John Novosel, where the video frame rate was fast enough to better capture images of his early-mid downswing.
Image 2 is at the P5 position and one can clearly see that the back of his left hand (GFLW) is parallel to his clubshaft's swingplane. Image 3 is at the P6+ position. Note that the back of his left hand (GFLW) is still parallel to his downswing's swingplane, and note that his clubface is parallel to the back of his left hand, and it is obviously not square to the clubhead arc - because he has not performed any biomechanical action between P4 and P6 to close the clubface. From that P6+ position, he has to get the back of his left hand (GFLW) to face the target by impact in order for his clubface (which is parallel to the back of his left hand) to face the target by impact. The only way that this is biomechanically possible is for Brendon to supinate his left forearm (roll his left forearm in a counterclockwise direction) between P6 and impact (presuming that he does not externally rotate his left humerus to a significant degree between P6 and impact). How can Brendon and MM be so ignorant regarding golf swing biomechanics that they are not aware of this introvertible fact?
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Nov 15, 2019 0:25:14 GMT -5
Watch the BBG-Malaska video between the 11:46 - 12:00 minute time points. MM states that he does not like to get to the P6 position with the back of his left hand facing the ball-target line and the toe of his club pointing upwards because he then has to use either a forearm rotation maneuver to square the clubface by impact or he has to close the clubface by "rotating the hell out of his body". Here are capture images from the video showing MM demonstrating how he closes the clubface by rotating his body a lot between P6 and impact. Image 1 is at the P6 position. Note that the back of his left hand is facing the ball-target line and the toe of the club is pointing up. Note that his torso is roughly parallel to the ball-target line. Image 3 is at simulated impact. Note that the back of his left hand is facing the target and his clubface is also facing the target. MM wrongheadedly believes that he rotated the back of his left hand and his clubface ~90 degrees between P6 and impact by his marked degree of body rotation - note that his pelvis and upper torso have rotated to face the target by impact. However, he is totally wrong!!! Body rotation between P6 and impact does not close the clubface unless the forearms rotate counterclockwise during that time period. Look at his left lower radial bone just above his left wrist crease in relationship to his left ante-cubital fossa and you will note that he is supinating his left forearm a lot between P6 and impact causing the watchface area of his left lower forearm to rotate ~90 degrees between image 1 and image 3. Look at how supinated his right forearm is at the P6 position so that he right palm is under the club handle and facing upwards towards the sky. Note how much he pronated his right forearm between P6 and impact to get his right palm to be positioned behind the club handle at impact, when it was positioned under the club handle at P6. That means that his right palm has rotated ~90 degrees and it is primarily due to right forearm pronation, and not due to body rotation (as MM wrongheadedly implies). MM is oblivious of the fact that his forearms are rotating between P6 and impact because he is not doing it consciously (deliberately). Addendum added later:
Here are capture images from my video where I demonstrated that body rotation alone does not close the clubface. I am using a badminton racquet for demonstration purposes because it is easier to see the racquet face. Image 1 is at a simulated P5.5 position where the back of my left hand, and therefore racquet face, is parallel to the swingplane, which means that the racquet face is still open relative to the racquet head's arc.
Image 2 is at simulated impact where I have rotated my body to a slightly open position. Note that the racquet face is still open to the same degree and it did not close between P5.5 and impact due to my body rotation. Image 3 is at simulated impact where I have rotated my body to a very open (exaggerated open) position. Note that the racquet face is still open to roughly the same degree and it did not close between P5.5 and impact due to my excessive amount of body rotation. Why did the racquet face not close and become square to the target secondary to my exaggerated body rotary motion happening between P5.5 and impact? The answer is that I did not externally rotate my left humerus and/or supinate my left forearm between P5.5 and impact. Also, note that my right palm, which was under the club handle at P5.5, is still under the club handle in image 3 and I did not allow my right forearm to pronate - compare my image 3 to image 3 of Mike Malaska's body rotation demonstration, and note that my left humerus is more internally rotated and my left forearm is less supinated. MM is squaring his clubface by externally rotating his left humerus and supinating his left forearm, and his clubface-squaring action is not due to body rotation!
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by syllogist on Nov 15, 2019 8:39:39 GMT -5
Dr. Mann,
I agree with your point. It is apparent though, as the hands make their way from club-parallel-to-ground to impact, without forearm rotation the clubface closes in relation to one point (ball) on the release arc. Malaska as well as many others claim incorrectly that the upper body must "carry" the hands along the release arc to avoid "excess" rotation.
My belief is that it is unlikely that any high-caliber golfer tries to rotate the forearms and it's not a question of whether it's conscious or unconscious. If we assume that Cheetham's study is accurate, there is axial rotation of the club in all cases in varying degrees, though he did not indicate why. What I think causes it is merely the force and velocity of the clubhead seeking to overtake the hands at some point during the arc of release.
S
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Nov 15, 2019 9:17:56 GMT -5
Dr. Mann, I agree with your point. It is apparent though, as the hands make their way from club-parallel-to-ground to impact, without forearm rotation the clubface closes in relation to one point (ball) on the release arc. Malaska as well as many others claim incorrectly that the upper body must "carry" the hands along the release arc to avoid "excess" rotation. My belief is that it is unlikely that any high-caliber golfer tries to rotate the forearms and it's not a question of whether it's conscious or unconscious. If we assume that Cheetham's study is accurate, there is axial rotation of the club in all cases in varying degrees, though he did not indicate why. What I think causes it is merely the force and velocity of the clubhead seeking to overtake the hands at some point during the arc of release. S Hi S I think there are some high-caliber golfers who actively rotate their lead forearms through impact (check out Phil below). With regards Cheetham's research , he surprisingly did not conduct any relationship of lead forearm degree of supination (or rate of supination) with strength of left hand grip . One might have suspicions that the stronger the left hand grip the less supination required to square the clubface . I'm not sure how degree of left hand grip strength would affect its rate of supination approaching impact because there are other factors in play such as the PA3 angle . The greater the PA3 angle the less the rate of clubface closure per unit travel of clubhead (ie. rate of supination would be lower). Also if the clubhead speed is greater from say P6-P7 (with same left hand grip strength and PA3 angle), won't this also mean the golfer having to square the clubface quicker before impact (ie. greater rate of lead forearm supination)? DG
|
|
|
Post by syllogist on Nov 15, 2019 9:55:16 GMT -5
Hi DG, I can only offer what I believe. Does the result of earlier extension of the trail arm as shown in the photo induce more axial rotation of the club as the clubhead seeks to pass the hands? Maybe. I don't even venture to offer theories of the effect of the relative strength of the lead hand grip. As for Cheetham's study, I think that it would have been more informative if he were to show the number of degrees of handle twist from a specified point in the downswing to impact rather than sheer velocity from a point of which I'm unaware. S
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Nov 15, 2019 10:12:12 GMT -5
Actually Phil M actually says he purposely rotates his forearm (especially his lead one) if you look at this video of him shaping shots.
He says that he uses specific ways to shape his shots .
If you look at 2:06 onwards he says that if he wanted increased clubface closure rate for a 'rounded hook' , he'd 'fold the front elbow' and keep it close to his body.
For a big fade, he says he steepens the attack angle. Unsure how he does this 'covering' action but maybe its excessive right arm PA#1 and PP1 pressure above the coupling point that pushes the 'left hand/arm' , creating more forward shaft lean before impact.
DG
PS. We don't have any 100% proof regarding the pressure forces being applied by the right hand/arm yet (with regards PP1/ PP3/other parts of the hand/fingers) and that would require some more experimental research.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Nov 15, 2019 10:48:12 GMT -5
S, You wrote-: " My belief is that it is unlikely that any high-caliber golfer tries to rotate the forearms and it's not a question of whether it's conscious or unconscious. If we assume that Cheetham's study is accurate, there is axial rotation of the club in all cases in varying degrees, though he did not indicate why. What I think causes it is merely the force and velocity of the clubhead seeking to overtake the hands at some point during the arc of release." I disagree 100% with your perspective that there is axial rotation of the clubshaft in the late downswing simply due to forces causing the release of PA#2 and I therefore believe that your knowledge of golf swing biomechanics is highly deficient. I believe that the reason why axial rotation of the clubshaft must happen in the late downswing is entirely due to the fact that all pro golfers rotate their left forearm clockwise (in a pronatory direction) during their backswing action in order to get their clubshaft to angle back behind the golfer with the back of their left hand facing skywards at the P4 position. All pro golfers have the back of their left hand facing skywards at the P4 position and that "fact" absolutely requires left forearm pronation - with the amount depending on i) the angle of the left arm at the P4 position and ii) left hand grip strength. If a golfer has a shallow clubshaft angle at the P4 position (like Rickie Fowler) then he needs to enact more left forearm pronation between P1 and P4 than a golfer who has a steep left arm angle at the P4 position (like Bubba Watson). If a golfer has a weak-or-neutral left hand grip, then he will need to enact much more left forearm pronation than a golfer who adopts a very strong left hand grip in order to get the back of the left hand to face skywards at the P4 position (presuming that they both have the same left arm angle and same left hand positional alignment at the P4 position).
To obtain a square clubface at impact, a golfer has to reverse the left forearm pronation that happened during the backswing and that reversal (requiring left forearm supination) cannot happen during the P4 => P5.5 time period when the intact LAFW is parallel to the swingplane and when the golfer has ~90 degrees of lag between the left arm and the clubshaft - because that would produce an undesirable clubshaft-steepening action (called "tumbling"). All pro golfers only enact their motion of left forearm supination (required to square the clubface by impact) after P5.5 (and not during the early downswing) - as seen in the following graph from Phil Cheetham's research study on 92 pro golfers. The vertical green line labelled "Release" represents the start of the release of PA#2 (which is due to left wrist radial => ulnar deviation). Note that the "twist release point" (when the clubshaft starts to rotate counterclockwise) happens significantly later. There are two phases of the handle twist release phenomenon - i) a slow phase (yellow zone) and ii) a fast phase happening after the yellow zone. Note that the blue graph (in the 2nd graph below) between the vertical green and violet arrows shows that there is very little left forearm supination happening during the slow phase of the handle twist phenomenon and that left forearm supination increases rapidly and dramatically after the vertical violet arrow (representing the release of PA#3). Note that the red graph's slope actually starts to decrease after the vertical violet arrow (when the degree of left forearm supination starts to increase dramatically in degree) and that the release of PA#2 is almost completed before the handle twist velocity happens in earnest to a much more marked degree. A major factor that affects the degree of overlap of the release of PA#3 with respect to the release of PA#2 is the accumulator #3 angle existing in the later downswing. If you take two pro golfers who adopt a neutral left hand grip, then the degree of overlap will be greater if the accumulator #3 angle is larger (eg. Sergio Garcia's swing) compared to a situation when the accumulator #3 angle is much smaller (eg. Phil Mickelson's swing). Golfers who adopt a very strong left hand grip (like Jamie Sadlowski and David Duval) have virtually no left forearm supination happening between P5.5 and impact because they did not significantly pronate their left forearm during their backswing action. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Nov 15, 2019 11:06:40 GMT -5
I can only offer what I believe. Does the result of earlier extension of the trail arm as shown in the photo induce more axial rotation of the club as the clubhead seeks to pass the hands? Maybe. I don't even venture to offer theories of the effect of the relative strength of the lead hand grip. As for Cheetham's study, I think that it would have been more informative if he were to show the number of degrees of handle twist from a specified point in the downswing to impact rather than sheer velocity from a point of which I'm unaware. S S,
That post-impact photo of Phil Mickelson does not show earlier extension of the rear arm and it only shows that Phil "runs-out-of-rear arm" so that his rear palm loses contact with his lead thumb and club handle - because his rear shoulder is so far back. If a right handed golfer "runs-out-of-right arm" and the rear forearm straightens excessively nearing impact then it is likely that the right forearm will pronate and it may therefore synergistically induce an uncontrolled roller hand release action through impact. However, that is not likely happening in that particular Phil Mickelson golf swing in the photo that you provided (where the rear palm is not even in contact with the lead thumb and club handle), although it may be happening in the following animated gif of Phil Mickelson's driver swing.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by syllogist on Nov 15, 2019 11:10:52 GMT -5
Dr. Mann,
I don't profess to be an expert in golf biomechanics. You pointed out the slow and the rapid twist velocity phases which are in the vicinity of the release interval that I find relevant. During release the clubhead accelerates. Thus one would expect the twist velocity to increase as the release phase progresses. The question is what increases the twist velocity. I proposed that the force and velocity of the clubhead does so, regardless of what biomechanical aspects of the swing are in play, which you may not agree with.
As a side, there was a study done in the early to mid 2000s (I don't recall the name) where the clubhead was fixed to the shaft in the sense that it could freely axially rotate around the shaft. The researchers wanted to know whether the clubface would axially square during the swing, independent of any arm rotation. The researchers found that it did axially square. Provided that the study was not flawed, such result would show that rotational forces acting on a clubhead offset in relation to the shaft would result in axial rotation of the clubhead.
There are times when a purely biomechanical explanation does not explain the phenomenon in question.
S
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Nov 15, 2019 11:28:51 GMT -5
Dr. Mann, I don't profess to be an expert in golf biomechanics. You pointed out the slow and the rapid twist velocity phases which are in the vicinity of the release interval that I find relevant. During release the clubhead accelerates. Thus one would expect the twist velocity to increase as the release phase progresses. The question is what increases the twist velocity. I proposed that the force and velocity of the clubhead does so, regardless of what biomechanical aspects of the swing are in play, which you may not agree with. As a side, there was a study done in the early to mid 2000s (I don't recall the name) where the clubhead was fixed to the shaft in the sense that it could freely axially rotate around the shaft. The researchers wanted to know whether the clubface would axially square during the swing, independent of any arm rotation. The researchers found that it did axially square. Provided that the study was not flawed, such result would show that rotational forces acting on a clubhead offset in relation to the shaft would result in axial rotation of the clubhead. There are times when a purely biomechanical explanation does not explain the phenomenon in question. S S,
Regarding your bold-highlighted statement, I would like to see that study where the researchers created a clubhead that could rotate around the axis of the clubshaft independent of rotation of the clubshaft. Also, that phenomenon would not represent what happens in a full golf swing action because the clubhead cannot rotate unless the clubshaft rotates to the same degree in a full golf swing action. A passive clubshaft rotary phenomenon happens in an Iron Byron golf robot machine, where a passive rotation of the clubshaft can happen in the later downswing if the design incorporates a rotating hinge joint at the level where the clubshaft attaches to the central arm. Both golf robot designs have a geared wrist that allows for passive clubshaft rotation happening at the level of the hinge joint (equivalent to a golfer's left wrist). However, that rotary clubshaft phenomenon happening at left wrist level does not happen in pro golfers who maintain an intact LFFW throughout their downswing. Any clubshaft rotation in the later downswing is due to left forearm rotation, which can be passive (as described by Kevin Ryan in the RYKE effect phenomenon).
You also wrote-: "During release the clubhead accelerates. Thus one would expect the twist velocity to increase as the release phase progresses."
I don't know why you would believe that twist velocity would increase simply because clubhead speed increases as the result of the release of PA#2.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Nov 16, 2019 8:12:15 GMT -5
Dr Mann When I look at this video below MM and Brendon seem to admit that the 'MM Move' is a feel and they claim that Sergio Garcia's downswing is an example of the 'MM Move'. I think MM doesn't actually understand the biomechanics of SG's downswing but he might be using the 'feel' of the 'Ryke Effect' when the lead arm becomes more vertical as in your website image 4 below. It almost seems that the 'MM Move' is only a suggested 'feel' to try and cure an 'underplane' swing fault but where his biomechanical explanations are flawed. DG ------------------------------------------ Consider what is actually happening between the P5.5 position and the P6.2 position. Sergio Garcia's downswing action between the P5.5 position and the P6.5 position - capture images from his swing video In image 1, the back of his GFLW is parallel to the inclined plane. Note how the back of his GFLW becomes vertical to the ground and parallel to the ball-target (by image 4) without throwing the clubshaft over-the-plane. In fact, he is actually releasing his clubshaft on-plane in these four images. The reason why this can happen is that i) his hands are going through the "tight-turn" of the hand arc path where they are being moved towards the target by the rotation of the body/arms as a singular functional unit without any additional left forearm supinatory motion. The amount of unitary body/arm rotary motion that moves the clubshaft outwards (while the club is starting to release due to the release of PA#2) is just enough to keep the releasing clubshaft on-plane, and not move it over-the-plane. What happens between the P6.2 position and impact? The club is continuing to releasing during this time period, and I have previously mentioned that the club should optimally release within the plane of the LAFW. So, consider this next image. Sergio Garcia at the P6 position - capture image from his swing video Note that the back of his GFLW is vertical and parallel to the ball-target line. Note that he has an intact LAFW and his clubshaft is inline with his left arm. If the clubshaft continuted to release within the plane of the LAFW, then one would expect it to follow the path of the curved yellow arrows (which would be an underplane clubshaft motion) if the GFLW always remained parallel to the ball-target line during the late downswing. However, that doesn't happen in Sergio Garcia's "real life" late downswing because the body and left arm are continuing to rotate counterclockwise between the P6 position and impact and the i) continued counterclockwise rotation of the GFLW causes the clubshaft to move outwards while ii) the club is releasing within the plane of the LAFW - and the clubshaft will remain on-plane if these two phenomena are perfectly blended. I think that Sergio Garcia perfectly blends these two phenomena in his late downswing action and I think that his clubshaft moves perfectly on-plane between the P6 position and impact - see images 6, 7 and 8 of his downswing sequence. It is important to realise that a tumbling action in the early-mid downswing (as described by Brian Manzella) is only necessary to correct for an underplane clubshaft. Most professional golfers have an on-plane clubshaft in the early-mid downswing (between the P4 position and the P6 position) - review if necessary these images of Keegan Bradley's on-plane clubshaft motion if you need a visual reminder - and they therefore do not have to use the tumbling action (which is biomechanically due to a left forearm supinatory motion) demonstrated by Brian Manzella. The outward tumbling motion of the clubshaft that occurs between the P6 position and impact must naturally happen in all golf swings if a golfer wants to keep his clubshaft on-plane, and it is not due to the biomechanics underlying Brian Manzella's described-tumbling action. Also, the release of PA#3 (which is primarily due to a left forearm supinatory motion) must be delayed to later than the P6.5 position, so that the clubshaft is closer to becoming straight-in-line with the left arm, to avoid too much outward motion of the clubshaft (which would throw the clubshaft over-the-plane).
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Nov 16, 2019 10:42:50 GMT -5
DG, I think that MM is wrong to claim that Sergio Garcia is performing the Malaska Move. Here is a capture image from that video where MM demonstrates how SG gets the clubshaft in front of him. Note how he is performing the right handed pivot motion that characterizes the Malaska Move - where the right hand gets on top of the club handle. That does not happen in Sergio's golf swing action. Look again at these capture images that you posted. Note that the clubshaft moves under his hands in an underplane manner between P5.5 and P6.2 and that his right hand never gets on top of the club handle as it moves from being under the club handle to becoming more behind the club handle.
MM believes that many golfers suffer from a club that falls down in the early downswing so that it is too horizontal (too shallow) and therefore off-plane (where an imaginary line drawn out from the butt end of the club will point well outside the ball-target line), and he believes that one needs to counteract that tendency with a clubshaft-steepening action. I agree that a clubshaft-steepening motion is required, but the correct solution is not the Malaska Move where the right hand "feels" like it must get on top of the club handle. I think that the optimum clubshaft-steepening move is to to supinate the left forearm slightly more, while decreasing the amount of right forearm supination, but only to the degree necessary to get the clubshaft back on-plane (where the imaginary line drawn out from the butt end of the club points at the ball-target line). Under those conditions, the right palm will never get on top of the club handle, and it will remain under the club handle - but the right palm will be less horizontal and slightly more vertical as a result of the corrective clubshaft-steepening action. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Nov 16, 2019 10:59:12 GMT -5
Another point about Sergio's golf swing action. Look again at these capture images. Note that Sergio's clubface is still significantly open to the clubhead arc at his P5.5 position (image 2). Then, to get a square clubface by impact, Sergio must start supinating his left forearm between P5.5 and impact in order to close the clubface relative to his clubhead arc. Sergio is definitely not getting his clubface squared by P6 and then avoiding any forearm rotation between P6 and impact - as MM wrongheadedly advises, and which never happens in a professional quality golf swing if the golfer has a neutral left hand grip and avoids any twistaway action. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by syllogist on Nov 17, 2019 8:35:01 GMT -5
Hi DG,
You wrote:
"Note that the back of his GFLW is vertical and parallel to the ball-target line. Note that he has an intact LAFW and his clubshaft is inline with his left arm. If the clubshaft continuted to release within the plane of the LAFW, then one would expect it to follow the path of the curved yellow arrows (which would be an underplane clubshaft motion) if the GFLW always remained parallel to the ball-target line during the late downswing. However, that doesn't happen in Sergio Garcia's "real life" late downswing because the body and left arm are continuing to rotate counterclockwise between the P6 position and impact and the i) continued counterclockwise rotation of the GFLW causes the clubshaft to move outwards while ii) the club is releasing within the plane of the LAFW - and the clubshaft will remain on-plane if these two phenomena are perfectly blended. I think that Sergio Garcia perfectly blends these two phenomena in his late downswing action and I think that his clubshaft moves perfectly on-plane between the P6 position and impact - see images 6, 7 and 8 of his downswing sequence. "
With regard to your highlighted bold thoughts, consider the trajectory of the clubhead and that just maybe such trajectory and momentum are themselves changing the orientation of his hands and it is not that Sergio has "perfected" a blending of two phenomena. How could the clubhead suddenly change its trajectory in the direction of the yellow arrows? Because it know how the wrist "should" uncock geometrically? In my view, there are biomechanical phenomena and phenomena resulting from physical forces and their vectors. It can often be difficult to distinguish between the two, leading to a confusion between cause and effect.
S
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Nov 17, 2019 10:11:17 GMT -5
S,
You wrote-: "With regard to your highlighted bold thoughts, consider the trajectory of the clubhead and that just maybe such trajectory and momentum are themselves changing the orientation of his hands and it is not that Sergio has "perfected" a blending of two phenomena. How could the clubhead suddenly change its trajectory in the direction of the yellow arrows? Because it know how the wrist "should" uncock geometrically? In my view, there are biomechanical phenomena and phenomena resulting from physical forces and their vectors. It can often be difficult to distinguish between the two, leading to a confusion between cause and effect."
You imply that the trajectory and momentum of the club are changing the orientation of the hands - rather than the other way around. From my perspective, that's the difference between a skilled and an unskilled golfer. The unskilled golfer has poor control of his club and allows its uncontrolled momentum to move the hands - rather than the other way around.
Jeff.
|
|