Does bowing the lead wrist close the clubface?

[imperfectgolfer]

In this post, I am going to analyse the "real life" effects of left wrist bowing on the golf swing of a pro golfer, and I will use Collin Morikawa as my first example.

CM uses a weak left hand grip and he starts to bow his lead wrist during the backswing so that he has an overtly bowed lead wrist by P4.

So, consider CM at his P4 position.

Image 1 shows his driver swing and image 2 shows his short iron swing.

Note that the degree of lead wrist bowing is similar in both images.

I measured the angle difference between the back of his lead forearm and his clubface to determine his degree of clubface closure at the P4 position and it measured 25 degrees. Note that I am using the back of his lead forearm as my reference point while JS in his demo-image measured a 40 degree angle change because he used a cupped lead wrist as his starting reference point. A slightly cupped lead wrist (10-15 degrees cupped) would be a good reference point for a golfer who uses a neutral lead hand grip, but a pro golfer who uses a weak lead hand grip will more likely have a flat lead wrist at the P4 position if he uses an intact LAFW technique where the clubshaft is straight-in-line with the lead forearm at P4.

Here is my altered image of the above CM image where I used a Photoshop technique to change image 2 to an intact LAFW alignment where bowing is absent and where the clubface is straight-in-line with his lead forearm.

I measured the difference in clubface angle between image 1 and image 2 and I got a measurement of 25 degrees.

Why is his clubface closed by 25 degrees at the P4 position? The correct answer is that his lead wrist is bowing when his lead wrist is radially deviated, and that causes clubshaft rotation with very little clubshaft angulation (note the small difference in clubshaft angulation between image 1 and image 2 and note that it is slightly more angulated to a "laid-off" position in image 1).

Now, let's consider what happens to his degree of lead wrist bowing and his degree of clubface closure between P4 and P6.

Image 1 is at P2, image 2 is at P4 and image 3 is at P6.

I have drawn a green line along the back of his lead forearm, a blue line along the back of his lead hand and a red line along his clubface and you can see that those 3 lines are parallel to each other at the P2 position - because he has an intact LAFW alignment and he has not yet started to bow his lead wrist.

Note that his lead wrist bowing phenomenon at the P4 position (image 2) causes the clubface (red line) to be more closed relative to the lead forearm (green line) by ~25 degrees.

At the P6 position (image 3), his lead wrist appears to be even more bowed (relative to his lead forearm) and I used Photoshop to measure the angle difference between the blue line and the green line and it came to ~40 degrees. This Photoshop measurement cannot be truly accurate because the lead hand and lead forearm are in two different planes and my Photoshop measurement is contaminated by a parallax error of unknown degree. The red line does not appear to be parallel to the blue line and that is likely due to parallax error due to the fact that his clubshaft is now angled back. I cannot accurately measure the degree of his clubface closure (relative to the clubhead arc) at the P6 position, but let's presume that it is about 30 degrees closed.

Now, let's consider what happens in the later downswing.

Image 1 is at the P6.2 position, image 2 is at the P6.5 position, image 3 is at the P6.8 position and image 4 is at impact.

Let's presume that his clubface is still closed to his clubhead arc by about 30 degrees (compared to an intact LAFW scenario) at his P6.2 position as a result of his lead wrist bowing phenomenon that happened between P4 => P6 (when his lead wrist was radially deviated to a significant degree). Theoretically, that could be an advantage because it could potentially decrease the amount of lead forearm supination required during his PA#3 release action in order to get a square clubface by impact.

However, that theoretical advantage would only really apply if he converted from having a bowed lead wrist to having a non-bowed lead wrist at ~P6 and if he came into impact with a non-bowed lead wrist and no forward shaft lean. The "true life" reality is that CM still maintains a markedly bowed lead wrist between P6 => P7 (when his lead wrist is becoming increasingly ulnar deviated) and that lead wrist bowing phenomenon (when the lead wrist is ulnar deviated) causes a large degree of clubshaft angulation away from the target. Note that his lead forearm (green line) has already reached the ball position by P6.5 (image 3) while his clubshaft is angled far back (away from the target) due to his continuing lead wrist bowing action happening in his late downswing when his lead wrist is becoming increasingly ulnar deviated.

What would happen to the clubface if a golfer has a lot of forward shaft lean in the later downswing (due to a lead wrist bowing phenomenon that angles the clubshaft back away from the target)? It would naturally open the clubface relative to the ball-target line. That means that the golfer still needs to enact a lot of lead forearm supination in the later downswing in order to get a square clubface by impact. Note how much CM's lead forearm has to supinate between P6.5 (image 3) and impact (image 5) - you can look at the degree of rotation of his left lower radial bone, or the watchface area of his lead lower forearm, or the back of his lead hand to get a visual impression of the approximate degree of lead forearm supination happening between P6.5 => P7. In fact, I strongly suspect that this clubshaft angulation phenomenon happening in the later downswing (due to lead wrist bowing when the lead wrist is ulnar deviated) has a greater effect on opening the clubface that is greater in amount than the clubface closing benefit due to lead wrist bowing happening in the early-mid downswing when the lead wrist is radially deviated!

Does CM have to use more lead forearm supination in his later downswing in order to get a square clubface by impact as a result of his lead wrist bowing technique that generates a lot of forward shaft lean by impact - compared to another pro golfer who uses a weak lead hand grip and who uses a non-bowed lead wrist technique and who has no forward shaft lean at impact? I suspect that the answer is affirmative!

Consider these capture image of CM at address (image 1) and at impact (image 2).

I have drawn a blue line over his lead lower radial bone at the level of his lower lead forearm and a red line down the middle of his lead antecubital fossa.

Note that his clubshaft is straight-in-line with his lead forearm at address and he has no forward shaft lean. Note that his lead antecubital fossa partially faces the camera at address because his lead humerus is not internally rotated very much at address (which is a frequent phenomenon in golfers who adopt a weak neutral lead hand grip).

Note how much his hands are ahead of the clubhead at impact (image 2) due to his marked degree of lead wrist bowing. Also, note that his lead humerus is more internally rotated at impact, which causes his lead antecubital fossa to be angled more away from the target (compared to image 1). Look at how much his left lower radial bone is rotated counterclockwise relative to his lead antecubital fossa at impact, and it suggests that his lead forearm is more supinated at impact compared to its degree at address.

Here are capture images of Jon Rahm (who also uses a weak lead hand grip) at address (image 1) and at impact (image 2).

Close-up views of the above image.

Note that Jon Rahm looks nearly identical to CM at impact - i) his lead humerus is internally rotated more at impact compared to address, ii) his hands are ahead of the clubhead and he has a similar amount of forward shaft lean and iii) his lead lower radial bone is rotated more counterclockwise relative to his lead antecubital fossa by a similar amount. For Jon Rahm to acquire those biomechanical features at impact, he has to use more lead forearm supination than usual during his PA#3 release action and his lead forearm is more supinated at impact than it was at address (according to a 3D graph that I will present when I analyse Jon Rahm's swing action in a future post).

Although I do not have a 3D graph of CM's golf swing action to prove that he uses more lead forearm supination during his PA#3 release action than usual - compared to a golfer who adopts a weak lead hand grip and a non-bowing lead wrist technique - due to his lead wrist bowing action happening in the later downswing when his lead wrist is significantly ulnar deviated, I strongly suspect that he does (based on the remarkable similarity of his impact alignments compared to Jon Rahm).

I am notorious for routinely advocating the intact LAFW/GFLW golf swing technique, but I actually think that the bowed lead wrist technique (as executed by CM) has three advantages over the intact LAFW/GFLW technique.

1) It closes the clubface by ~30 degrees during the earlier downswing and that makes the clubface transition to the clubface closing phenomenon that happens in the later downswing (during the PA#3 release action) more gradual (and not suddenly abrupt as seen in Phil Mickelson's driver swing action).

2) It makes it easier for a golfer to acquire forward shaft lean at impact, which is very desirable when it comes to solid ball-striking.

3) It is very conducive to performing a drive-hold hand release action through impact.

Here are capture images of CM's DH-hand release action.

Note how CM keeps the clubface square to his clubhead arc between impact (image 1) and P7.4 (image 3) and this is more easily possible because he comes into impact with a bowed lead wrist and he maintains his bowed lead wrist, and avoids lead wrist flipping, between P7 and P7.4.

Jeff.

[dubiousgolfer]

Dr Mann

Very interesting analysis :

With reference to your point 2 statement below:

2) "Pure" lead wrist bowing (in the absence of a twistaway maneuver or lead wrist circumduction) produces a significant amount of clubshaft angulation with no (or very little) clubshaft rotation in a clubface-closing direction - if the lead wrist is ulnar deviated.

Do golfers with weak grips and bowed wrists in the early downswing have significant lead wrist ulnar deviation from P6.5-P7.4 ? If they do have significant ulnar deviation and they retain that bowed lead wrist into P7 but use a flexion to extension hand release through impact , wouldn't this also mean no (or very little) clubshaft rotation in a clubface-closing direction? If yes, then isn't the rate of lead forearm supination post impact a bigger factor than pure flipping in limiting the ROC through impact for a D'Her (with a weak grip) ?

Further, you stated :

"However, that theoretical advantage would only really apply if he converted from having a bowed lead wrist to having a non-bowed lead wrist at ~P6 and if he came into impact with a non-bowed lead wrist and no forward shaft lean."

Why non-bowed at ~P6? Couldn't the golfer become non-bowed when there is more ulnar deviation at around P6.5?

If a golfer with a weak grip had problems squaring the clubface by P7 , they could bow their lead wrist in the early downswing (when they had radial deviation), thereby closing the clubface early , then allow the lead wrist to straighten (when there was more ulnar deviation) between P6-P6.5. This would mean less angulation and open clubface relative to target line and would require less lead forearm supination to square the clubface by P7.

Further, while doing the latter they could theoretically incorporate a 'pure flip' lead hand release action (ie. flexion to extension) through impact (while still in ulnar deviation) causing little/no clubface rotation. Not that I would advocate a 'pure flip' hand release because I could easily imagine it turning into a 'flip-roll'.

But what about golfers who don't have weak grips but bow their wrists with a neutral or strong grip like DJ? What effect would these different grip strengths have on clubface closure (while in radial deviation) and angulation (when increased ulnar deviation)?

DG

PS. 
I tried recreating your demonstrations above with a strong grip (ie. rotating the club closed about 30-40 degrees then gripping the rotated shaft with a weak grip) . It seems obviously the same effect but with a clubface that is more closed.

[imperfectgolfer]

DG,

My answers to your questions (in italics).


Do golfers with weak grips and bowed wrists in the early downswing have significant lead wrist ulnar deviation from P6.5-P7.4 ?

Yes.

If they do have significant ulnar deviation and they retain that bowed lead wrist into P7 but use a flexion to extension hand release through impact , wouldn't this also mean no (or very little) clubshaft rotation in a clubface-closing direction?

That may be true for many pro golfers.

Consider these capture images of Brandt Snedeker's release through impact.

Note that the clubface seems to be reasonably square to the clubhead path in image 2.

However, if a golfer has any left wrist circumductory roll motion during the flipping phenomenon, then the clubface ROC will be greater.

Here are capture images of Jordan Spieth flipping through impact.

It looks like a flip-rolling non-DH hand release action.

If yes, then isn't the rate of lead forearm supination post impact a bigger factor than pure flipping in limiting the ROC through impact for a D'Her (with a weak grip)?

That could well be true.

If a golfer with a weak grip had problems squaring the clubface by P7 , they could bow their lead wrist in the early downswing (when they had radial deviation), thereby closing the clubface early, then allow the lead wrist to straighten (when there was more ulnar deviation) between P6-P6.5. This would mean less angulation and open clubface relative to target line and would require less lead forearm supination to square the clubface by P7.

On further thought, if a golfer converts from having a bowed lead wrist in the early downswing to then having a GFLW during the later downswing, I can imagine the fingers torquing the club handle more counterclockwise as he converts from being bowed to becoming non-bowed. That may mean that the degree of lead forearm supination required during a PA#3 release action would be unchanged - compared to the scenario where he had a GFLW throughout the entire downswing.

But what about golfers who don't have weak grips but bow their wrists with a neutral or strong grip like DJ? What effect would these different grip strengths have on clubface closure (while in radial deviation) and angulation (when increased ulnar deviation)? I tried recreating your demonstrations above with a strong grip (ie. rotating the club closed about 30-40 degrees then gripping the rotated shaft with a weak grip) . It seems obviously the same effect but with a clubface that is more closed. 

I think that the results for a neutral lead hand grip would be similar to that described for a weak lead hand grip.

Regarding  a very strong lead hand grip (eg. Jamie Sadlowski), where the clubface is already closed to the back of the lead hand by >45 degrees, I cannot imagine the golfer bowing his lead wrist more. Have you ever seen a pro golfer, who uses a very strong lead hand grip, significantly bow his lead wrist during the downswing?

Regarding the issue of lead wrist bowing bowing when a golfer uses a moderately strong lead hand grip (eg. DJ), I think that it is roughly similar to the phenomena happening with a weak/neutral lead hand grip but the clubshaft will angle more inwards towards the thighs during the clubshaft angulation happening when the bowed lead wrist becomes ulnar deviated.

Jeff.

[dubiousgolfer]

Many thanks Dr Mann

DG

[dubiousgolfer]

Dr Mann

When I fully bow my left wrist , I find it impossible to perform radial or ulnar deviation and wondering whether this is a normal impediment or just specific to me? When I do attempt radial or ulnar deviation with a degree of bowed left wrist , it tends to make my forearm supinate/pronate (similar to your demonstration diagram where you couldn't stabilise your left wrist because you were holding the camera with your right hand)

If the above wrist 'impediments' are the norm , then it doesn't make sense to bow the wrist when trying to load/release PA#2. So if a golfer wanted to close the clubface with a bowed left wrist without compromising the loading/releasing of PA#2 , wouldn't it be optimal to bow it before P6.5 (when there is still some radial deviation and PA#2  not yet fully released), then 'unbow' the left wrist (after release of PA#2) into P7?

DG

PS.  The above seems a very complex  way of performing the downswing and I imagine requires incredible timing.

[imperfectgolfer]

Sept 29, 2020 5:56:33 GMT -5 dubiousgolfer said:

Dr Mann

When I fully bow my left wrist , I find it impossible to perform radial or ulnar deviation and wondering whether this is a normal impediment or just specific to me? When I do attempt radial or ulnar deviation with a degree of bowed left wrist , it tends to make my forearm supinate/pronate (similar to your demonstration diagram where you couldn't stabilise your left wrist because you were holding the camera with your right hand)

If the above wrist 'impediments' are the norm , then it doesn't make sense to bow the wrist when trying to load/release PA#2. So if a golfer wanted to close the clubface with a bowed left wrist without compromising the loading/releasing of PA#2 , wouldn't it be optimal to bow it before P6.5 (when there is still some radial deviation and PA#2  not yet fully released), then 'unbow' the left wrist (after release of PA#2) into P7?

DG

PS.  The above seems a very complex  way of performing the downswing and I imagine requires incredible timing.

I think that many golfers will find it difficult to radially deviate their lead wrist when they bow their lead wrist, and I think it's a normal phenomenon. However, I think that there are a subset of golfers (like Collin Morikawa and Jon Rahm) who not have this impediment and they may choose to bow their lead wrist during their backswing so that they have a frankly bowed lead wrist at P4 and that will enable them to close the clubface by ~30 degrees at P4. They also then have the ability to retain that small degree of clubface closing in the early-mid downswing to ~P6.2. The advantage is that they can get a smoother (more gradual) clubface closing transition with respect to the further clubface closing phenomenon that happens in the later downswing due to their PA#3 release action.

Here again is Collin Morikawa's clubface closing pattern seen between P6.2 => P7.

Note that the clubface is slightly closed at P6.2 (image 1) and that it then closes further due to a PA#3 release action between P6.5 and P7. However, it does not seem to close significantly more between P6.2 => P6.5, which means that his PA#3 release action only happens between P6.5 => P7. But, most importantly, because his clubshaft is angled further back at P6.5 (due his lead wrist bowing action) so that his clubhead is about 12" outside his right leg at P6.5 he does have a longer clubhead travel distance to complete his PA#3 release action.

By contrast, here is Henrik Stenson's clubface closing phenomenon in his late downswing.

Image 1 is at P6.3, image 2 is at P6.5, image 3 is at P6.8 and image 4 is at P7.

Henrik Stenson uses a neutral lead hand grip and he does not bow his lead wrist during the downswing.

Note that Henrik Stenson's clubface is more open at P6.3 (compared to Collin Morikawa's clubface at P6.2). However, note that he steadily closes his clubface over the entire P6.3 => P7 time period by using a PA#3 release action (lead forearm supination action). In particular, note that the back of his lead hand is closing smoothly and gradually between P6.3 => P6.5 (due to lead forearm supination) as much as it closes between P6.3 => P6.5 and between P6.5 => P6.8 and between P6.8 => P7. Also, note that his clubshaft is angled back so that his clubhead is about 12" outside his right leg at P6.3 so he has a long clubhead travel distance to complete his PA#3 release action (which is similar to CM's P6.5 => P7 travel distance). Because HS's clubface is slightly more open at P6.3 (compared to CM's clubface at P6.5) he seemingly has to close the clubface more than CM over the same clubhead travel distance, but the difference may not be significant.

Jeff.

[dubiousgolfer]

Dr Mann

Could golfers like CM, Rahm and DJ be purposely bowing their lead wrists at P4 to limit their amount of radial deviation?

For example ,if they have very flexible wrists in the radial deviation direction and retained a GFLW wrist up to P4, could this cause them unwanted excessive radial deviation? Therefore to prevent this , could they be subconsciously 'bowing' their lead wrist?

DG

[imperfectgolfer]

Sept 30, 2020 11:57:22 GMT -5 dubiousgolfer said:

Dr Mann

Could golfers like CM, Rahm and DJ be purposely bowing their lead wrists at P4 to limit their amount of radial deviation?

For example ,if they have very flexible wrists in the radial deviation direction and retained a GFLW wrist up to P4, could this cause them unwanted excessive radial deviation? Therefore to prevent this , could they be subconsciously 'bowing' their lead wrist?

DG

Cupping the lead wrist at P4 (like Jamie Sadlowski) increases a golfer's ability to get a larger degree of clubshaft lag, while bowing the lead wrist would have the opposite effect. However, I doubt that CM, JR and DJ deliberately bow their lead wrist in order to decrease their lag angle at P4 and they probably do it because it is biomechanically natural for them. DJ stated in a video interview that he has always bowed his lead wrist by P4 and he "feels' that it is neutral for him, and not a deliberate clubface-closing action.

Jeff.

[imperfectgolfer]

I am now going to discuss the effect of bowing the lead wrist during the mid-downswing (like Gary Woodland) rather than bowing the lead wrist by P4 (like Collin Morikawa and Dustin Johnson and Jon Rahm).

Here is Gary Woodland's 3D graph.

Note that GW's lead wrist is extended at P4 and that he starts to bow his lead wrist after ~P5. His lead wrist bowing phenomenon reaches its peak magnitude just before impact, and it decreases slightly by impact.

Here are capture images showing that phenomenon.

Note that GW has a GFLW at P4 (image 1) and at P5 (image 3) and that his clubface is straight-in-line with his lead lower forearm because he uses a neutral lead hand grip.

Note that GW starts to bow his lead wrist at P5.5 and that he is overtly using the biomechanical combination of "early lead forearm supination + lead wrist palmar flexion" by P6. Note that it closes his clubface relative to the clubhead arc by a small amount.

Now, let's consider the P6 => P7 time period.

Image 1 is at P6, image 2 is at P6.2, image 3 is at P6.5, image 4 is at P6.8 and image 5 is at impact.

Note that his clubface is slightly closed at P6 and P6.2 due to the lead wrist bowing maneuver that he starts to initiate in his mid-downswing.

Note that his clubface steadily closes further between P6.2 => P7 due to a PA#3 release action (which is secondary to lead forearm supination).

Let's compare him to Henrik Stenson and Collin Morikawa.

Henrik Stenson

Collin Morikawa

If you compare their P6.5 positions, GW's clubhead is slightly further away from the target (compared to HS) because lead wrist bowing angles the clubshaft backward away from the target (when the lead wrist becomes more ulnar deviated), and his clubface is slightly more closed (but not as much as CM's clubface at his P6.5 position).

Note that GW and HS have a similar amount of clubface closure at P6.8 and a similar amount of forward shaft lean. To get a similar amount of forward shaft lean, GW has to supinate his lead forearm slightly more than HS because his bowed lead wrist angles the clubshaft back (when his lead wrist is ulnar deviated). CM has to supinate his lead forearm even more by P6.8 because he has a larger degree of backward clubshaft angulation secondary to his marked degree of lead wrist bowing still present at P6.8.

GW's clubface at P6.2 is less closed than CM's clubface at P6.2 because he starts to bow his lead wrist when his lead wrist is less radially deviated (and therefore more ulnar deviated).

GW's degree of clubface closure at P6.2 is intermediate in degree between HS's degree of clubface closure at P6.2 and CM's degree of clubface closure at P6.2.

Whether these small differences are significant is not clear to me.

Jeff.

[imperfectgolfer]

I am now going to describe another pro golfer who has a bowed lead wrist at impact, but who does not start bowing his lead wrist during the backswing (like Collin Morikawa) or in the mid-downswing before P6 (like Gary Woodland) and he only starts to bow his lead wrist after P6.

Consider Cameron Champ's superb DH-hand release action.

Note that CC has a bowed lead wrist at impact (image 1), which allows him to have his hands ahead of the ball at impact and that allows him to more easily have forward shaft lean at impact.

Note that he maintains a bowed lead wrist to P7.4 (image 3) while he is performing a DH-hand release action, which keeps his clubface square to his clubhead path between P7 => P7.4.

When does CC start to bow his lead wrist?

Here are capture images showing CC's early-mid downswing between P4 => P6.1.

Image 1 is at P4, image 2 is at P5, image 3 is at P5.5 and image 4 is at P6.1.

CC uses a weak-neutral lead hand grip, and his clubface is straight-in-line (parallel) to the back of his lead hand and watchface area of his lead lower forearm at P4 because he has a GFLW/intact LAFW.

Note that he still has a GFLW at P5, P5.5 and P6 and that his clubface is still straight-in-line (parallel) to the back of his GFLW and the watchface area of his lead lower forearm between P4 => P6.1 because he maintains an intact LFFW/GFLW during that time period. Note that he does not bow his lead wrist or close the clubface relative to the clubhead arc between P4 => P6.1.

Now, let's look at his late downswing.

Image 1 is at P6, image 2 is at P6.2, image 3 is at P6.5, image 4 is at P6.8 and image 5 is at impact.

Note that he has a FLW at P6 (image 1) and that his clubface is open to the clubhead path and that the toe of his clubhead is pointing straight upwards.

Note that he has a slightly bowed lead wrist at impact (image 5) and that allows his to have forward shaft lean at impact due to the fact that the bowing the lead wrist angulates the clubshaft backwards (away from the target) when the lead wrist is ulnar deviated.

Note that his clubface is open to the clubhead arc at P6.2 and it closes steadily between P6.2 => P7 due to a PA#3 release action (which is biomechanically due to lead forearm supination).

Note the remarkable similarity of his clubface closing pattern between P6.2 => P7 to Henrik Stenson's clubface closing pattern between P6.2 => P7 in the capture images below.

Note that his clubface is similarly open at P6.2 and that it closes at the same steady rate between P6.2 => P7 due to a PA#3 release action.

In other words, bowing the lead wrist in the late downswing after P6 does not close the clubface relative to the clubhead arc and it only causes angulation of the clubshaft backwards away from the target. Note that CC has the same degree of forward shaft lean at impact as HS, and that he acquires that small degree of forward shaft lean by bowing his lead wrist while HS obtains that same degree of forward shaft lean by having his lead forearm slightly less supinated (and therefore slightly more pronated) at impact while he has a GFLW (non-bowed lead wrist) at impact.

Jeff.

[dubiousgolfer]

Dr Mann

I am assuming that golfers who have extended left wrists will cause:

1. The clubface to be more open when in radial deviation
2. More 'Forward' angulation of club when in ulnar deviation

That if they retained the extension into impact , they will need to supinate less than if they adopted a GFLW technique throughout.

But how does one assess how much 'opening/closing' of the clubface by 'extension/flexion' is affected by the 'closing/opening' of clubface (relative to target line) due to 'forward/backward' angulation? You have shown in previous posts that the angulation seems to outweigh the bowing (ie. extra supination required to square the club) so can we assume that will be some biomechanical norm?

I am also assuming that the kinetics will change due to extension/flexion in both the backswing and downswing if they affect the hinging and unhinging of the wrists. For example , any bowing/extension in the backswing might influence the degree of PA#2 loading (exception being those golfers whose wrists do not have any impedance like DJ, Rahm, CM). Similarly any retained extension/flexion from P4 might have 2 affects with regards clubhead speed, one negative while the other possibly positive.

1. Negative effect on clubhead speed- more impedance in the unhinging of the lead wrist could compromise a fluid PA#2 release
2. Positive effect on clubhead speed - more impedance in the unhinging of the lead wrist could help retain the PA2 angle for a later release

Further , I'm unsure whether creating more wrist 'unhinging impedance' by extension/flexion might require some assisted 'hand couple' to assist release of PA#2 for point 2 above.

This all seems very complex indeed .

DG

PS.  How will this affect the 'Reverse Motorcycle' move? I am assuming any 'extra clenched finger torque' clubface closing effect will still dissipate by P7 whilst in flexion or not.

[imperfectgolfer]

DG,


You wrote-: "I am assuming that golfers who have extended left wrists will cause:

1. The clubface to be more open when in radial deviation
2. More 'Forward' angulation of club when in ulnar deviation

That if they retained the extension into impact, they will need to supinate less than if they adopted a GFLW technique throughout."

Your facts are correct, but no rational pro golfer would deliberately flip pre-impact based on those facts. It is very difficult to control a clubhead/clubface that has bypassed the lead hand and virtually all pro golfers reach impact with forward shaft lean, and never backward shaft lean. Also, when the flipping clubshaft angulates forwards as it nears impact (when the lead wrist is ulnar deviated), that will change the clubhead path to move in a more inside-left direction and that will cause ball flight inaccuracy even if the clubface does not change its angle relative to the clubhead path. Do you really imagine a pro golfer would be trying to decrease his lead forearm supination in the late downswing in order to correct for that fact?

Jeff.

[imperfectgolfer]

I am now going to analyse another pro golfer - Jon Rahm - who uses the bowed lead wrist technique.

Here is JR's 3D graph.

The green graph represents his lead wrist flexion-extension graph.

Note that his lead wrist is bowed at P4, and it then becomes less bowed in his early downswing. Then it increasingly bows again in his mid-downswing, reaching its peak lead wrist palmar flexion value just before impact, before becoming slightly less bowed at impact.

What explains these different bowing phenomena?

JR uses a weak lead hand grip and he bows his lead wrist to a small degree during his backswing action, so that it is slightly bowed at P4 (image 1). Note that the small degree of lead wrist bowing closes the clubface to a barely discernible degree relative to his clubhead arc.

Note that JR's lead wrist is less bowed at P5 (image 2) and that his clubface does not appear closed and it is roughly parallel to the back of his lead lower forearm.

Image 3 is at P5.5 and you can see that JR is bowing his lead wrist much more and it is causing his clubface to close slightly relative to his clubhead arc. What is causing his increased degree of lead wrist bowing in his mid-downswing? It is due to the "combined lead wrist palmar flexion + early lead forearm supination" maneuver and it is probably also accentuated with a small amount of twistwaway (due to his 4th and 5th fingers increasingly twisting his club handle counterclockwise).

Image 4 is at P6 - note that his clubface is slightly closed by ~10 degrees relative to his clubhead arc.

Now, let's consider his late downswing.

Image 1 is at P6.3, image 2 is at P6.5, image 3 is at P6.8 and image 4 is at impact.

Note that his clubface is only slightly closed at P6.3.

Note that his clubface steadily closes between P6.3 => P7 due to a PA#3 release action, which is biomechanically due to lead forearm supination.

Note that he has a significantly bowed lead wrist between P6.3 => P7, which angulates his clubshaft backwards (away from the target) when his lead wrist is ulnar deviated. Note that his hands are well forward of his clubhead at impact due to his forward shaft lean and to get a square clubface with that amount of forward shaft lean he needs to use a little more lead forearm supination than expected for a golfer who uses a weak lead hand grip.

Here again is Henrik Stenson's clubface closing action in his late downswing.

Note that HS's clubface is only slightly more open than JR's clubface at the P6.2 position. Note that JR's lead hand seems to be more rotated counterclockwise than HS's lead hand at ~P6.2 because he used the early lead forearm supination maneuver in his mid-downswing.

Note that there is no evidence that JR is using a lesser amount of lead forearm supination between P6.2 => impact than HS. Any benefit JR obtained by closing the clubface between P4 => P6.2 is offset by the increased degree of clubshaft angulation happening in the later downswing between P6.2 => P7 when lead wrist bowing angulates the clubshaft backwards (away from the target) as the lead wrist becomes increasingly ulnar deviated.

Jeff.

[dubiousgolfer]

Daniel Berger does the opposite and increases his lead wrist extension by P5.5- P6.2 and then changes back to a GFLW by P6.5 - P7. By retaining that extension as he moves into more ulnar deviation doesn't he therefore leave the clubface more open and will therefore need to supinate more to square the clubface by P7 (than if he had retained a GFLW in the whole downswing)?



DG

[imperfectgolfer]

Oct 3, 2020 18:12:22 GMT -5 dubiousgolfer said:

Daniel Berger does the opposite and increases his lead wrist extension by P5.5- P6.2 and then changes back to a GFLW by P6.5 - P7. By retaining that extension as he moves into more ulnar deviation doesn't he therefore leave the clubface more open and will therefore need to supinate more to square the clubface by P7 (than if he had retained a GFLW in the whole downswing)?



DG

Daniel Berger uses such a very strong left hand grip that the TGM concept of a GFLW is not relevant. The back of his lead hand is roughly parallel to the swingplane (inclined plane) between P6 => P7 and the degree of lead wrist extension mainly determines his clubshaft's VSP (accumulator #3 angle) and he uses virtually no PA#3 release action in order to square the clubface by impact. The degree of clubface opening in his late downswing is mainly determined by his degree of radial deviation of his lead wrist, which determines how angled back his clubshaft is as he approaches impact.


Jeff.