3565
Journeyman Pro
Have you not got Google?
I have, but I'm more of a show it to me and I'll replicate it then to sit and decipher a book or internet reading and to apply my brain in a physical way........
Swing smoother, hit further!
- Thread starter delc
- Start date
I have, but I'm more of a show it to me and I'll replicate it then to sit and decipher a book or internet reading and to apply my brain in a physical way........
Pro Zach
Assistant Pro
To steal a phrase, this is twaddle. To suggest that someone writing this absolute nonsense has a Ph.D. is laughable. YOU DON'T HAVE A CLUE WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.
Sorry if this sounds offensive to anyone but writing such drivel while claiming authority is in itself offensive.
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
If you disagree with something then do more than throw insults about as it makes you sound immature and stupid.
Are you immature and stupid? Why not make some grown up arguments to persuade us otherwise.
the_coach
Journeyman Pro
with this as a topic it was never goin to be short - could have been a whole bunch longer ..... but the reading of is not compulsory
force is a result of mass multiplied by acceleration (‘force’ at collision impact in a golf sense is clubhead speed)
there’s a bunch differing ‘forces’ going on when folks swing a golf club with the one of the intents being to produce a ‘speed’ of the clubhead through impact (along with other optimum launch conditions)
one part of these ‘forces’ that’s always there is the vertical component of force which is always goin to be affected by the constant acceleration of gravity
(even when folks standing still doin nothing the vertical ground reaction force there is, is equal to their weight (force of body mass caused by gravity)
what’s key though to the production of clubhead speed (‘force’) at collision impact is that through the whole swing motion this vertical force changes due to the motion of movements that folks make - so this vertical force is affected both by gravity and also the total acceleration, so including the acceleration that folks produce through their swing motion itself
depending just how folks move (the efficiency of) during the swing motion, the vertical force can be greater or lesser than their body weight
easy ways to experience this is weighing on a scale (scale calculates body mass from ‘force’ with the known acceleration of gravity) and bending at the knees to get on the scale, first off scale will show a lower body mass (weight) due to negative acceleration, then as the downward (bending) movement slows (as folks balance to straighten up) it momentarily shows a higher body mass due to positive acceleration
but when all the movement of getting on the scale has stopped it will show the true body mass as at this point there is zero acceleration except that of gravity
any folks that are still here up to this point - the reason for sure all of that is important in a golf swing is the ‘ground reaction force’ is a real critical part of being able with a swing motion to produce maximum club head speed (force) at collision impact
anyone imagining this not to be the case should find the nearest rink to them and try out producing clubhead speed with a swing motion on the ice ….
principle of grf is in itself a ways simple as the laws of motion dictate that for every action there is an equal & opposite reaction (folks exert pressure/force into the ground, the ground 'exerts' pressure/force back)
throughout a swing motion a force is exerted into the ground by the golfer swinging the club (better sequenced golf motions will for sure be able to utilize grf in a ways to produce more clubhead speed/force at collision impact)
it’s a tad more complicated and would take many pages to explain fully as there are also horizontal components or shear force component to grf and these are indirectly affected by gravity as they also increase with vertical force
like say sliding the foot over the ground more force exerted down at the same time it becomes increasingly more difficult to slide the foot
so with sufficient traction (enough vertical force) between the golfer’s feet and the ground the ‘horizontal force’ allows folks to push in one direction and to move in the opposite direction
this is what is taking place during the rotational movement of the backswing pivot, changing at transition, and taking place again in the downswing
(there is also of course the centripetal force (& centrifugal force) between the rotational motion and the arms and golf club - but then again to go into this fully is something else again
at it’s real essence the 3 major force components through a swing motion are all acting at the same time, hopefully through a good sequence of motion this provides folks the ability to produce torque ‘about’ the vertical axis
vertical force has to be there for there to be any horizontal (shear) force
the rotational motion itself is just a result of the horizontal forces acting in ‘opposite’ (not just left and right but also diagonal shear forces) directions at the feet to ground connection
(forces in the toe/heel - heel/toe direction are primarily working to cause rotation with the forces in left/right - right/left direction primarily providing the stability for balance during the motion)
better athletic body condition combined with optimum swing motion sequencing technique is going to be able to produce a faster clubhead speed/force at collison/impact
(also the physicality of height to have a wider/bigger overall swing arc - combined with these other 2 factors would produce a great clubhead speed than a narrower/smaller swing arc all other things being equal)
force is a result of mass multiplied by acceleration (‘force’ at collision impact in a golf sense is clubhead speed)
there’s a bunch differing ‘forces’ going on when folks swing a golf club with the one of the intents being to produce a ‘speed’ of the clubhead through impact (along with other optimum launch conditions)
one part of these ‘forces’ that’s always there is the vertical component of force which is always goin to be affected by the constant acceleration of gravity
(even when folks standing still doin nothing the vertical ground reaction force there is, is equal to their weight (force of body mass caused by gravity)
what’s key though to the production of clubhead speed (‘force’) at collision impact is that through the whole swing motion this vertical force changes due to the motion of movements that folks make - so this vertical force is affected both by gravity and also the total acceleration, so including the acceleration that folks produce through their swing motion itself
depending just how folks move (the efficiency of) during the swing motion, the vertical force can be greater or lesser than their body weight
easy ways to experience this is weighing on a scale (scale calculates body mass from ‘force’ with the known acceleration of gravity) and bending at the knees to get on the scale, first off scale will show a lower body mass (weight) due to negative acceleration, then as the downward (bending) movement slows (as folks balance to straighten up) it momentarily shows a higher body mass due to positive acceleration
but when all the movement of getting on the scale has stopped it will show the true body mass as at this point there is zero acceleration except that of gravity
any folks that are still here up to this point - the reason for sure all of that is important in a golf swing is the ‘ground reaction force’ is a real critical part of being able with a swing motion to produce maximum club head speed (force) at collision impact
anyone imagining this not to be the case should find the nearest rink to them and try out producing clubhead speed with a swing motion on the ice ….
principle of grf is in itself a ways simple as the laws of motion dictate that for every action there is an equal & opposite reaction (folks exert pressure/force into the ground, the ground 'exerts' pressure/force back)
throughout a swing motion a force is exerted into the ground by the golfer swinging the club (better sequenced golf motions will for sure be able to utilize grf in a ways to produce more clubhead speed/force at collision impact)
it’s a tad more complicated and would take many pages to explain fully as there are also horizontal components or shear force component to grf and these are indirectly affected by gravity as they also increase with vertical force
like say sliding the foot over the ground more force exerted down at the same time it becomes increasingly more difficult to slide the foot
so with sufficient traction (enough vertical force) between the golfer’s feet and the ground the ‘horizontal force’ allows folks to push in one direction and to move in the opposite direction
this is what is taking place during the rotational movement of the backswing pivot, changing at transition, and taking place again in the downswing
(there is also of course the centripetal force (& centrifugal force) between the rotational motion and the arms and golf club - but then again to go into this fully is something else again
at it’s real essence the 3 major force components through a swing motion are all acting at the same time, hopefully through a good sequence of motion this provides folks the ability to produce torque ‘about’ the vertical axis
vertical force has to be there for there to be any horizontal (shear) force
the rotational motion itself is just a result of the horizontal forces acting in ‘opposite’ (not just left and right but also diagonal shear forces) directions at the feet to ground connection
(forces in the toe/heel - heel/toe direction are primarily working to cause rotation with the forces in left/right - right/left direction primarily providing the stability for balance during the motion)
better athletic body condition combined with optimum swing motion sequencing technique is going to be able to produce a faster clubhead speed/force at collison/impact
(also the physicality of height to have a wider/bigger overall swing arc - combined with these other 2 factors would produce a great clubhead speed than a narrower/smaller swing arc all other things being equal)
Last edited:
Foxholer
Blackballed
@Coach
There's a lot of good stuff in that post! Thanks (I think) for introducing Gravity - the only element of Potential Energy (as opposed to 'potentially energy') there is in a swing.
There is, however, 1 glaring, if not very important, error. Scales measure Weight - the Force - not Mass. The Mass of a body does not magically change when the knees are bent (or straightened), simply the force (Weight). If that experiment/demonstration (Space Suit required!) was performed on the Moon, the numbers (Weight) would be different but the Mass would the same (provided the same Space Suit was included in the Earth conducted one
).
There is also a 'glaring' and very important 'error' (well, misconception really) that has pervaded the thread! F=MA (Newton's 2nd Law) will always be applicable, but it is not the area of Physics that is most relevant to the club-head/golf ball collision! To prove my point, consider the following... F=MA does not mention Speed (Velocity really, but will do here), so the calculation (of any extra distance provided by Wrist Torque (Torque being Rotational Force) is just as relevant if done while stationary as if it were done with the arms moving! Try doing that and you will see that very little is possibly gained - and should notice that the effect on club-face can be rather severe! This is pretty much what experience has shown happens in 'full-speed' swings - the recommendation is 'Don't actively manipulate the wrists (just let them uncock) or if you do, timing is absolutely critical!
The area of Physics that IS appropriate is that referred to in Rod White's explanation ... http://www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/golfSwingPhysics.php
One of his conclusions (from the mathematics he provides) is that (poorly timed) wrist torque can actually reduce Club-Head speed - because of its effect on the 2-Pendulum 'System' that represents the Golf Swing. Increased Lag/Wrist Cock, however, can increase Clubhead Speed significantly - all reflecting what Teachers generally say and the models can demonstrate!
Another question for you that may resolve other issues in the thread...
If a Golfer swings at 100mph (Club-Head speed), does it matter whether he is 100lbs or 300lbs? Or is Club-Head Speed all that matters?!
There's a lot of good stuff in that post! Thanks (I think) for introducing Gravity - the only element of Potential Energy (as opposed to 'potentially energy') there is in a swing.
There is, however, 1 glaring, if not very important, error. Scales measure Weight - the Force - not Mass. The Mass of a body does not magically change when the knees are bent (or straightened), simply the force (Weight). If that experiment/demonstration (Space Suit required!) was performed on the Moon, the numbers (Weight) would be different but the Mass would the same (provided the same Space Suit was included in the Earth conducted one
). There is also a 'glaring' and very important 'error' (well, misconception really) that has pervaded the thread! F=MA (Newton's 2nd Law) will always be applicable, but it is not the area of Physics that is most relevant to the club-head/golf ball collision! To prove my point, consider the following... F=MA does not mention Speed (Velocity really, but will do here), so the calculation (of any extra distance provided by Wrist Torque (Torque being Rotational Force) is just as relevant if done while stationary as if it were done with the arms moving! Try doing that and you will see that very little is possibly gained - and should notice that the effect on club-face can be rather severe! This is pretty much what experience has shown happens in 'full-speed' swings - the recommendation is 'Don't actively manipulate the wrists (just let them uncock) or if you do, timing is absolutely critical!
The area of Physics that IS appropriate is that referred to in Rod White's explanation ... http://www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/golfSwingPhysics.php
One of his conclusions (from the mathematics he provides) is that (poorly timed) wrist torque can actually reduce Club-Head speed - because of its effect on the 2-Pendulum 'System' that represents the Golf Swing. Increased Lag/Wrist Cock, however, can increase Clubhead Speed significantly - all reflecting what Teachers generally say and the models can demonstrate!
Another question for you that may resolve other issues in the thread...
If a Golfer swings at 100mph (Club-Head speed), does it matter whether he is 100lbs or 300lbs? Or is Club-Head Speed all that matters?!
Foxholer
Blackballed
In that case, you should be ashamed of (most of) the following post!
And.....
Can you fault anything in Rod White's article http://www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/golfSwingPhysics.php Both he and Tutelman are pretty well qualified to publish the Physics/Math(s) behind the swing!
Last edited:
drdel
Tour Rookie
What it seems impossible for you; DRIVER351 and Foxholer to accept is the effect of whether the golfer has a technique that permits acceleration of the club head through the impact zone. I am not arguing about the function of clubhead speed and distance. I am disagreeing with whether for the exact same clubhead speed, (same trampoline effect, same golf ball deformation, same shaft distance etc. etc) will always (potentially) give the same distance.
Delc's post was about swinging smoother; my contention, backed by science, is that because the swing is 'smoother' the same club head speed at the precise instant of impact produces a different 'smash' input if the clubhead is accelerating, than at static velocity or indeed decelerating. For the average golfer the smoother swing pmore likely means the club head is still accelerating through the zone and in those fractions of a second while the ball deforms against the clubhead the CoG of both the club and the ball come closer together and, supplemented by the reforming and rebounding ball, an accelerating club head is in contact with the ball (pushing it) for a few milliseconds longer hence imparting more power (force times distance) in addition to the force from the kinetic energy (mass times velocity squared) that came form the head's speed.
A decelerating or coasting clubhead (when the golfer has spent his energytoo early e.g. when trying to 'hit' it hard) may be travelling at the same velocity but it now relies only on the trampoline and all other effects which because the clubhead velocity has become slower than that of the ball it looses contact with the ball whose hysterisis in reformation has sent it off the head sooner thus less power is transferred to it. As a consequence of the lower total energy imparted to the ball less potential distance results.
Delc's post was about swinging smoother; my contention, backed by science, is that because the swing is 'smoother' the same club head speed at the precise instant of impact produces a different 'smash' input if the clubhead is accelerating, than at static velocity or indeed decelerating. For the average golfer the smoother swing pmore likely means the club head is still accelerating through the zone and in those fractions of a second while the ball deforms against the clubhead the CoG of both the club and the ball come closer together and, supplemented by the reforming and rebounding ball, an accelerating club head is in contact with the ball (pushing it) for a few milliseconds longer hence imparting more power (force times distance) in addition to the force from the kinetic energy (mass times velocity squared) that came form the head's speed.
A decelerating or coasting clubhead (when the golfer has spent his energytoo early e.g. when trying to 'hit' it hard) may be travelling at the same velocity but it now relies only on the trampoline and all other effects which because the clubhead velocity has become slower than that of the ball it looses contact with the ball whose hysterisis in reformation has sent it off the head sooner thus less power is transferred to it. As a consequence of the lower total energy imparted to the ball less potential distance results.
the_coach
Journeyman Pro
@Coach
There's a lot of good stuff in that post! Thanks (I think) for introducing Gravity - the only element of Potential Energy (as opposed to 'potentially energy') there is in a swing.
There is, however, 1 glaring, if not very important, error. Scales measure Weight - the Force - not Mass. The Mass of a body does not magically change when the knees are bent (or straightened), simply the force (Weight). If that experiment/demonstration (Space Suit required!) was performed on the Moon, the numbers (Weight) would be different but the Mass would the same (provided the same Space Suit was included in the Earth conducted one
There is also a 'glaring' and very important 'error' (well, misconception really) that has pervaded the thread! F=MA (Newton's 2nd Law) will always be applicable, but it is not the area of Physics that is most relevant to the club-head/golf ball collision! To prove my point, consider the following... F=MA does not mention Speed (Velocity really, but will do here), so the calculation (of any extra distance provided by Wrist Torque (Torque being Rotational Force) is just as relevant if done while stationary as if it were done with the arms moving! Try doing that and you will see that very little is possibly gained - and should notice that the effect on club-face can be rather severe! This is pretty much what experience has shown happens in 'full-speed' swings - the recommendation is 'Don't actively manipulate the wrists (just let them uncock) or if you do, timing is absolutely critical!
The area of Physics that IS appropriate is that referred to in Rod White's explanation ... http://www.tutelman.com/golf/swing/golfSwingPhysics.php
One of his conclusions (from the mathematics he provides) is that (poorly timed) wrist torque can actually reduce Club-Head speed - because of its effect on the 2-Pendulum 'System' that represents the Golf Swing. Increased Lag/Wrist Cock, however, can increase Clubhead Speed significantly - all reflecting what Teachers generally say and the models can demonstrate!
Another question for you that may resolve other issues in the thread...
If a Golfer swings at 100mph (Club-Head speed), does it matter whether he is 100lbs or 300lbs? Or is Club-Head Speed all that matters?!
maybes you should read the post again
"easy ways to experience this is weighing on a scale (scale calculates body mass from ‘force’ with the known acceleration of gravity) and bending at the knees to get on the scale, first off scale will show a lower body mass (weight) due to negative acceleration, then as the downward (bending) movement slows (as folks balance to straighten up) it momentarily shows a higher body mass due to positive acceleration
but when all the movement of getting on the scale has stopped it will show the true body mass as at this point there is zero acceleration except that of gravity"
the rest of that para so after the underlined bracketed part, is written taken the underlined part, as a given, as stated from the outset
- most folks associate the reading of a scale as a reading of body mass weight - so back in the real world a 'short hand' way of folks finding out a 'reasonably true' measure of how heavy they are
however get on a scale in the real world and it will react as described above as due to negative then positive acceleration the real world 'weight/body mass read out' as understood by most' will react as described - bearing in mind the phrase written at the start of the para - (scale calculates body mass from ‘force’ with the known acceleration of gravity)
taking place during the rotational movement of the backswing pivot, changing at transition, and taking place again in the downswing
(there is also of course the centripetal force (& centrifugal force) between the rotational motion and the arms and golf club - but then again to go into this fully is something else again
at it’s real essence the 3 major force components through a swing motion are all acting at the same time, hopefully through a good sequence of motion this provides folks the ability to produce torque ‘about’ the vertical axis
torque 'about' a vertical axis - here "about" being a word chosen carefully as it refers to the rotational motion affect on the "arms and club" note here it was the arms and club that distinction again chosen carefully - there was no mention of 'wrists' as a separate entity and no mention of a somewhat often times misleading phrase 'wrist torque' - and again no mention of any independently induced wrist motion through impact to provide, quoting "any extra distance"
in regard to the last sentence/question would just refer back to an initial point made from the get-go
(‘force’ at collision impact in a golf sense is clubhead speed)
and no folks on earth produce a golf swing motion that is not affected by gravity
plus to produce optimum clubhead speed to a max in any swing motion has to done using ground reaction force with an optimum sequence of the swing motion
Foxholer
Blackballed
The additional distance that an (actually) accelerating clubhead makes over the tiny period it is in contact with the ball is negligible - at least if clubhead speed is maximised at initial impact. The club is in contact with the ball for a few microseconds! By how much will the clubhead speed increase over that period?
You claim your opinion is 'backed by science'! Time to actually provide that science (and plug in the numbers!) or admit to it posting twaddle!
Accelerate through the ball is a (pretty good) swing thought! It helps maintain/maximise Clubhead Speed - the key to distance! Any additional acceleration - during the very small time the face and ball are in contact - provides only a tiny bit of extra speed/distance.
Again this marginal benefit can be demonstrated by performing the 'acceleration' from stationary, with a small push (representing an acceleration of 1mph) of the ball by the clubhead. Absolutely naff-all distance gained!!
White also states that the 30-50 metres he gained has also been achieved with 'less effort'. This seems to correspond to DelC's 'swing smoother hit further'!
3565
Journeyman Pro
Golf is deceptively simple but endlessly complicated...................by man!!!
Robobum
Money List Winner
Wow. Some of you need to find something productive to do with your time.
Drugs, hookers, gambling..... Anything which means you stop.........just stop.........please!!!
Please stop
Drugs, hookers, gambling..... Anything which means you stop.........just stop.........please!!!
Please stop
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
I believe it would be unhealthy to just stop. Freud developed the theory that humans have an unconscious in which sexual and aggressive impulses are in perpetual conflict for supremacy with the defences against them. Maybe a better way would be for us to wean ourselves away from the debate by letting our feminine sides dominate such that we pay compliments to all posts no matter how wrong they may appear to us.
Sorry, I'll get me coat Sweet Cheeks.
Norrin Radd
Tour Winner
this gets my vote for thread of the year. :thup:
Since changing to a smoother swing I am consistently scoring in the low 80's and had a 78. My driving distance has gone up from about 210 yards to about 250 yards, but the biggest improvement is in my iron play, where I am hitting each club about 20 yards further and generally much cleaner and straighter. Golf almost (but not quite) seems like an easy game again! 
Slab
Occasional Tour Caddy
Could someone please just answer this simple Q
Car A accelerates and hits space hopper at 30pmh
Car B speed is constant and hits space hopper at 30pmh
Car C is decelerating and hits space hopper at 30pmh
Assuming all other factors are equal i.e car size/weight, wind etc etc etc... where can I buy 3 space hoppers?
edit: just thinking this through I also need a rather large oversized tee, perhaps 6-8 inch diameter head, thanks
Car A accelerates and hits space hopper at 30pmh
Car B speed is constant and hits space hopper at 30pmh
Car C is decelerating and hits space hopper at 30pmh
Assuming all other factors are equal i.e car size/weight, wind etc etc etc... where can I buy 3 space hoppers?
edit: just thinking this through I also need a rather large oversized tee, perhaps 6-8 inch diameter head, thanks
Last edited:
Region3
Ryder Cup Winner
Olympic torch for the tee, should have change from a grand off ebay.
Pilates balls are better than space hoppers because they don't have ears (handles) that stop it rolling properly.
HTH :thup:
Slab
Occasional Tour Caddy
Thanks, I did consider pilates balls but then thought it a bit unscientific, after all how are the forum members supposed to hang on after impact?
It just introduces a random element dependent on thigh gripage and would doubtless skew results
Cheers for the torch idea though
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
How about this:
You get a choice of a skinny 8 stone whimp punching you in the face at 10 MPH or a 20 stone Schwarzenegger .
Last edited:
Region3
Ryder Cup Winner
Ah, didn't realise there were forum members on the space hoppers as they got mashed by vehicles. Carry on.
Slab
Occasional Tour Caddy
Naturally I was gonna use kids of equal size but figured forumers might be interested in seeing the practical elements of the test first hand (if I call it a Forum Opportunity I reckon it'll get a good uptake)
