|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Feb 9, 2020 23:09:57 GMT -5
Dr Mann
What do think of Chuck Quinton claims that Cameron Champs career will be short-lived by the shear/compression forces being exerted on his spine by his swing technique?
DG
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 10, 2020 0:51:33 GMT -5
I have always wondered whether the use of a lot of right lateral bend in the downswing (as used by many pro golfers like Cameron Champ, Dustin Johnson, Bubba Watson and Jamie Sadlowski) would increase the risk of spinal injuries (particularly with respect to the facet joints and intervertebral discs). Intuitively, one could easily imagine that the risk of spinal injury must be greater, but I am not aware that it has been scientifically shown to be true based on a well-designed golf research study. The lack of solid scientific evidence does not mean that right lateral bend does not increase the risk of spinal injury, and it could simply reflect the lack of completion of a definitive scientific study. Another interesting possibility is that golfers (eg. Jamie Sadlowski) who use a lot of right lateral bend naturally/automatically/comfortably (without trying to force their spine to move beyond its physical limits) may have a genetic capacity that protects them from injury. I am open-minded about this issue, and I personally only recommend the use of right lateral bend to a golfer if he can perform it very comfortably without any discomfort. As a general rule, I believe that one should never force the spine to perform a particular motion if it induces pain.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 10, 2020 10:47:22 GMT -5
See this Chuck Quinton video on back pain - starting at the 16 minute time point. You will note that CQ is opposed to the use of a CP-arm release action combined with a no-roll DH hand release action because he believes that it will predispose to low back pain in the lumbar area. I partly disagree with his argument because I think that it will more likely predispose to low back pain if the pelvis does not rotate enough counterclockwise while the upper torso is rotating counterclockwise in an inside-left direction - thereby generating a lot of torso-pelvic separation. However, if you have enough skill and flexibility to rotate your pelvis in synchrony with the rotating upper torso thereby avoiding excessive torso-pelvic separation (like Ben Hogan in the capture images below) then I suspect that it will not cause chronic low back pain issues. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 10, 2020 11:35:29 GMT -5
Here is a link to a review article on low back pain in golfers - www.researchgate.net/publication/284712088_The_Biomechanics_of_the_Modern_Golf_Swing_Implications_for_Lower_Back_Injuries/link/596c2ab50f7e9b80919894c4/downloadHere is a quote from the article-: " Nevertheless, radiographic findings suggest that golfers demonstrate a higher rate of bone spurs (osteophytes) and degenerative changes to the trail side of the lumbar facets than non-playing controls [29, 100]. According to Sugaya et al. [29, 100], the distinct laterality of these changes provides evidence for the damaging effects of the asymmetric motion of the modern golf swing. On the basis of these findings, Sugaya et al. [101] proposed a new measure dubbed the crunch factor, which was intuitively devised based on the knowledge that both lateral trunk flexion toward the trail side and axial trunk rotational velocity reach their peak shortly after ball impact. The authors defined the lumbar crunch factor as the instantaneous product of these two kinematic quantities and hypothesised that the combined effect of these factors contributed to degenerative changes and injuries to the lumbar spine. As such, it has been suggested that the crunch factor may be a useful objective measure for comparing the mechanics of the trunk in injured and healthy golfers [29]. Empirical evidence demonstrates that peak crunch factor values occur about 52 ms following ball contact, which provides some support for the possible value of this measure in assessing injury potential in golfers [102]. However, to date, only two independent studies [68, 96] have presented data for the crunch factor in a population of golfers specifically suffering with LBP. The results of these studies demonstrated that golfers with LBP did not demonstrate significantly different peak crunch factor values than asymptomatic controls, which suggests that while the fundamental concepts that underpin this measure may be sensible, other factors are likely responsible for the development of low back injuries in this population." Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Feb 10, 2020 12:03:13 GMT -5
Many thanks for those links to that article Dr Mann. Interestingly , I was looking at a 'Ben Allen' article below and noticed something that I was unaware about. www.academia.edu/30090350/Reengineering_7_Why_the_Modern_Golf_Swing_Causes_Back_PainSpecifically on page 16 about the orientation of the facet joint on the 'fifth lumbar vertebral- sacral joint'. Ben Allen says: "A large majority of golf related back pain results from pathology at the fifth lumbar vertebral sacral joint. Rotational strain there is greater than at other lumbar motion segments due to the differing facet joint orientations.In the upper lumbar spine the facets tend to limit rotation because of their orientation as shown on the left. At the lumbosacral junction, as shown on the right, the facet joints do not limit rotation as much as in the upper lumbar motion segments. Consequently, the lumbosacral junction is much more vulnerable to injury by rotational strain (torque)."So is L5 the most vulnerable when you say the below? "more likely predispose to low back pain if the pelvis does not rotate enough counterclockwise while the upper torso is rotating counterclockwise in an inside-left direction - thereby generating a lot of torso-pelvic separation"DG
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 10, 2020 12:08:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 10, 2020 12:19:15 GMT -5
Many thanks for those links to that article Dr Mann. Interestingly , I was looking at a 'Ben Allen' article below and noticed something that I was unaware about. www.academia.edu/30090350/Reengineering_7_Why_the_Modern_Golf_Swing_Causes_Back_PainSpecifically on page 16 about the orientation of the facet joint on the 'fifth lumbar vertebral- sacral joint'. Ben Allen says: "A large majority of golf related back pain results from pathology at the fifth lumbar vertebral sacral joint. Rotational strain there is greater than at other lumbar motion segments due to the differing facet joint orientations.In the upper lumbar spine the facets tend to limit rotation because of their orientation as shown on the left. At the lumbosacral junction, as shown on the right, the facet joints do not limit rotation as much as in the upper lumbar motion segments. Consequently, the lumbosacral junction is much more vulnerable to injury by rotational strain (torque)."So is L5 the most vulnerable when you say the below? "more likely predispose to low back pain if the pelvis does not rotate enough counterclockwise while the upper torso is rotating counterclockwise in an inside-left direction - thereby generating a lot of torso-pelvic separation"DG Where is the "evidence" that L5 disc herniation is the causal factor in the large majority of golf-related back pain problems and where is the "evidence" that if a golfer has a L5 disc herniation problem that it was caused by playing golf rather than another factor? Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Feb 10, 2020 18:19:41 GMT -5
Many thanks for those links to that article Dr Mann. Interestingly , I was looking at a 'Ben Allen' article below and noticed something that I was unaware about. www.academia.edu/30090350/Reengineering_7_Why_the_Modern_Golf_Swing_Causes_Back_PainSpecifically on page 16 about the orientation of the facet joint on the 'fifth lumbar vertebral- sacral joint'. Ben Allen says: "A large majority of golf related back pain results from pathology at the fifth lumbar vertebral sacral joint. Rotational strain there is greater than at other lumbar motion segments due to the differing facet joint orientations.In the upper lumbar spine the facets tend to limit rotation because of their orientation as shown on the left. At the lumbosacral junction, as shown on the right, the facet joints do not limit rotation as much as in the upper lumbar motion segments. Consequently, the lumbosacral junction is much more vulnerable to injury by rotational strain (torque)."So is L5 the most vulnerable when you say the below? "more likely predispose to low back pain if the pelvis does not rotate enough counterclockwise while the upper torso is rotating counterclockwise in an inside-left direction - thereby generating a lot of torso-pelvic separation"DG Where is the "evidence" that L5 disc herniation is the causal factor in the large majority of golf-related back pain problems and where is the "evidence" that if a golfer has a L5 disc herniation problem that it was caused by playing golf rather than another factor? Jeff. I've searched the web but couldn't find any evidence. Although I did find an interesting survey on golf-related lower back injuries where they sent a questionnaire out to many golf clubs (although response was low). www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2647075/Seems there was also an article by "Sugaya H, Tsuchiya A, Moriya H. In: Low back injury in elite and professional golfers: an epidemiologic and radiographic study" that involved a large number of Japanese golfers but I can't find a copy. I suppose we will just have to wait for more research findings. DG
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 11, 2020 0:00:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on Feb 11, 2020 9:05:49 GMT -5
Amazing - almost unbelievable (not much X-factor there).
DG
|
|
|
Post by syllogist on Feb 11, 2020 10:07:47 GMT -5
The contortionist was amazing. I'd say he's not a candidate for back pain from exhibiting flexibility. Not much force required to get into those positions. S
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Feb 11, 2020 10:22:33 GMT -5
Amazing - almost unbelievable (not much X-factor there). DG The important point to gain from this video is that human beings have a variable degree of spinal flexibility and that there are a subset of golfers who have the flexibility to incorporate a lot of right lateral bend and "crunch factor" in their downswing action without putting themselves at risk of spinal injury. I think that CQ is too dogmatic to assert that it is harmful to use right lateral bend in the downswing and to use a CP-arm release action during the followthrough. If he rather stated that he lacks the spinal flexibility to perform a CP-arm release action combined with a no-roll hand release action through impact without discomfort, then I would respect his personal opinion, but I think that he is wrong to claim that it should not be used by any golfer (even if they have the flexibility to perform it without any discomfort). I personally think that the CP-arm release action combined with a no-roll hand release action (as performed by Ben Hogan) is probably the most biomechanically efficient way to control the clubface between P7 and P7.2, and I think that it is a very suitable technique that can be used by golfers who are lucky enough to have the flexibility to perform the action without any back discomfort. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on May 22, 2020 20:29:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on May 22, 2020 22:16:55 GMT -5
Stunning! However, not really surprising! I have zero sympathy for Chuck Quinton, who is very arrogant and very opinionated! I am lucky that I have never tried to make money as a result of acquiring insights into golf swing biomechanics/mechanics, and I freely offer my insights without trying to make money from them. Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by dubiousgolfer on May 23, 2020 7:36:22 GMT -5
I know this sounds cruel but I had the nagging suspicion that him crying in that video was stage managed.
DG
|
|