PDA

View Full Version : Power in a golf swing.



virge666
7th May 2008, 01:45 PM
Jarro just asked where the power comes from in an Edwin swing...

So let's keep it real simple... where does the power come from in kinds of swings . . . Where does it come from in your swing ?

Don't need Planes, Lag, or Flat left wrists or anything technical... just real simple. How is this for a starting point.


Watch this video . . . it is a guy call Chuck Evans and he is one of those "Golfing Machine" guru's. I have met this guy in the USA and he is a great teacher and even better a fantastic communicator.


Here he demonstrates one of the more complex chapters of the Golfing machine tomb. The power accumlators or "The Power Sources"


http://www.thegolferschoice.com/ozgolf/

The Video is called "Four_power_accumulators" and it is one of my favourite vids over the years. Ignore what he says about swingers and hitters, just absorb the 4 different ways of powering a stroke.

We can then use this when analysing our swings.

Jarro
7th May 2008, 02:01 PM
The question i'd like to ask is : How do you get maximum power with the least amount of effort ?

;)

Toolish
7th May 2008, 02:30 PM
You need to float load your power package into a snap release position and hold on to maximum trigger delay before releasing through impact while sustaining the line of compression on a straight line delivery path thereby allowing the endless belt and centrifugal force to work for you! :)

Sorry...couldn't help myself.

Jarro
7th May 2008, 02:39 PM
That link doesn't appear to be working for me Virge ???

3oneday
7th May 2008, 02:50 PM
Jesus.

Jarro
7th May 2008, 02:53 PM
Yes my son ?

virge666
7th May 2008, 02:53 PM
Jesus.

Don't complain three . . . YOU LOVE IT !

How are my I-10's looking ?

Toolish
7th May 2008, 02:53 PM
try again Jarro...vid is there.

3oneday
7th May 2008, 02:55 PM
How are my I-10's looking ?they are 4 to U, orange dot, PX 6.0, matching orange and black duals.... got a woody yet ?

:lol:

virge666
7th May 2008, 03:02 PM
they are 4 to U, orange dot, PX 6.0, matching orange and black duals.... got a woody yet ?

:lol:

Everything except the shafts and the orange dot... :lol:

virge666
7th May 2008, 03:05 PM
That link doesn't appear to be working for me Virge ???


There is an AVI and an MPG there now... see if you can get either to work. Also check your files size - should be 11MB or there-abouts.

Anyone else got problems with viewing the video ? :oops:

Rusty
7th May 2008, 04:41 PM
You need to float load your power package into a snap release position and hold on to maximum trigger delay before releasing through impact while sustaining the line of compression on a straight line delivery path thereby allowing the endless belt and centrifugal force to work for you! :)

Sorry...couldn't help myself.

that youtube vid is fantastic :smt038



How are my I-10's looking ?

i find it hard leaving leaving mine (http://www.ozgolf.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=881&d=1201918285) in the garage...

b1_
10th May 2008, 10:11 PM
I'm not sure the rolling of the wrists is a power accumulator in so far as you should be trying to roll the wrists faster to gain more power. If you tried this it would be very difficult to control.

I feel like my power comes from my upper body trying to get the arms rotating, and the angle retention between my left arm and shaft (lag of course), something I'm trying to find out how to improve right now. Just dunno how these pros manage to get so much angle and keep the wrist flat. Every time I try to flex some more angle into it it feels like I'm about to break my wrist.

Jono
15th May 2008, 07:55 PM
There are more than four "power accumulators". IMO, it's only good for dinner conversation at a TGM convention. ;)

Clubhead speed comes mainly from the speed of the arms and hands. Body movements contribute about 20%. Weight shift per se only contributes about 10% (Jorgensen).

BTW, your analysis of Lamb and Toms is wrong. Toms makes a better weight shift than Lamb.

Jono
15th May 2008, 08:15 PM
I used the Paint program to illustrate the weight shift in the two players you mentioned.

http://img372.imageshack.us/img372/8510/weightar7.jpg

I drew two green verical lines. One from the left ankle (ie. on the shoe laces, not the toes) and the other from the righ ankle. Then, using the number of pixels between the two lines, I drew a pink like half way.

You make your own conclusions. ;)

virge666
15th May 2008, 09:06 PM
There are more than four "power accumulators". IMO, it's only good for dinner conversation at a TGM convention. ;)


It is TGM . . . but I do like it... as it gives clear advice on what to speed up.



Clubhead speed comes mainly from the speed of the arms and hands. Body movements contribute about 20%. Weight shift per se only contributes about 10% (Jorgensen).


So by that logic if I move my body faster and my hands move at the same speed - I will hit the ball further . . .



BTW, your analysis of Lamb and Toms is wrong. Toms makes a better weight shift than Lamb.

Don't care who makes a better weight shift - it is not important. They both make a great TURN !

virge666
15th May 2008, 09:09 PM
I used the Paint program to illustrate the weight shift in the two players you mentioned.


Again, don't care - don't care . . .oh my god I just so don't care.

They are two different swing patterns - all I am looking at is the angles -the ball doesn't know that one bloke moved his left knee inwards and the other bloke moved his knee over his foot.

Weight shift is just SO irrelevant, look at the direction of the turn and the position of the pivot -they are both great positions.

3oneday
15th May 2008, 09:19 PM
Toms looks like Couples in that pic.

You two should really do something about your pent up frustrations ;)



:lol:

virge666
15th May 2008, 09:21 PM
I'm not sure the rolling of the wrists is a power accumulator in so far as you should be trying to roll the wrists faster to gain more power. If you tried this it would be very difficult to control.


It isn't about what you can control - it is a power source. And what I have been taught over the years and I tend to agree with is that the power sources have to be directly attached to the club, and the rest sort of have a supporting role.

Like an engine being THE ONLY power source in a car - but without suspension in the car - you cannot use ALL of that power without the car skipping along the road.

I use to think the pivot helped out a lot but really it just helps to load the other 4 power sources. The feeling of your upper body getting your arms moving is actually the power source # 4.

Jono
15th May 2008, 09:22 PM
It is TGM . . . but I do like it... as it gives clear advice on what to speed up.


TGM is based on one man's definitions and perceptions. If you want to limit yourself to his beliefs, then stick to TGM. However, if you want objective reality, you should look beyond TGM.



So by that logic if I move my body faster and my hands move at the same speed - I will hit the ball further . . .


No, it doesn't work like that. You have to TRANSFER the energy from the body to the hands at the right time. The body actually SLOWS down in order to transfer the energy. If you read Jorgensen's "Physics of Golf" he shows you how weight shift can add to clubhead speed.


Don't care who makes a better weight shift - it is not important. Who makes the better TURN !

I don't agree with your statement that if you turn correctly, the shift will take care of itself. Can't you see from my diagram that Lamb and Toms have different amounts of weight transfer?

The body movement comprises of BOTH a turn and a shift. You can't ignore one or the other. I agree with you that you should be able to perform this without thinking about it. However, that should be done through practice and repetition, not because one thing is guaranteed if you do the other.

3oneday
15th May 2008, 09:23 PM
Off we go again.... keep it short girls :p


;)

virge666
15th May 2008, 09:23 PM
Toms looks like Couples in that pic.

You two should really do something about your pent up frustrations ;)
:lol:


Couples has way higher hands . . . and I love this stuff, I get to see if I can actually support any of the crap I am sprouting.

All the mid markers do is just nod . . . or even worse . . . GUESS.

3oneday
15th May 2008, 09:25 PM
I was meaning the relaxed way he is sitting at the top, Freddy looks so relaxed 8)

Jono
15th May 2008, 09:29 PM
Again, don't care - don't care . . .oh my god I just so don't care.

They are two different swing patterns - all I am looking at is the angles -the ball doesn't know that one bloke moved his left knee inwards and the other bloke moved his knee over his foot.

Weight shift is just SO irrelevant, look at the direction of the turn and the position of the pivot -they are both great positions.

Well, FFS, if you don't CARE about the weight shift, then don't talk about it. I pointed out an obvious error in your PERCEPTION when you did your video piece that you titled "weight shift".

You drew some arbitary line and said that most of Lamb's weight is on the right side and that it happened automatically because of his good turn. My diagram shows you clearly that it's not.

Now you're saying that the weight shift is irrelevant?

Jono
15th May 2008, 09:36 PM
All the mid markers do is just nod . . . or even worse . . . GUESS.

Mid markers are much better guide lines than some arbitary lines you drew up on your video.

The only part of your body that touches the ground are your feet. Left foot and right foot. If you want most of your weight on your right foot, then most of your body has to come over towards the right foot. If more body mass is right of the mid line, then more of your weight is on your right foot.

Remember, I'm not talking about dynamic reaction forces.

virge666
15th May 2008, 09:42 PM
Now you're saying that the weight shift is irrelevant?

I have ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS said that weight shift is totally and utterly irrelivant.

That is what started this whole discussion.

And even if I did, both his arms - the club, his shoulders and a lot of his head is over his right side . . . you cannot really think his COG in that position is over his left side. :shock:

But I don't care because it is irrelevant.

How good is the shoulder turn and body position though . . . yeah baby. :smt038

Jono
15th May 2008, 09:48 PM
http://img372.imageshack.us/img372/8510/weightar7.jpg




I have ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS said that weight shift is totally and utterly irrelivant.

That is what started this whole discussion.

And even if I did, both his arms - the club, his shoulders and a lot of his head is over his right side . . . you cannot really think his COG in that position is over his left side. :shock:

But I don't care because it is irrelevant.

How good is the shoulder turn and body position though . . . yeah baby. :smt038

Bit of anatomy. Arms don't weigh a lot. The butt weighs heaps. Lamb has his butt shoved to his left, doing the famous Edwin shimmey.

You can ignore weight shift, you can TURN your back to it (pun intended. ;)), but you are missing out on 10% extra power and ... you'd be reverse pivotting. :razz:

virge666
15th May 2008, 10:06 PM
Bit of anatomy. Arms don't weigh a lot. The butt weighs heaps. Lamb has his butt shoved to his left, doing the famous Edwin shimmey.


No, he hasn't - watch the video again . . . and the swing sequence is on the FTP. his right hip moves backa tiny amount to facilitate the shoudler turn, anything else you want to make up ?

And you don't know what the schimmy is.

The schimmy is the act of pulling the shoulders back without moving the hips - The drill is there to promote the shoulders going around the spine and not under the chin. It was designed to simulate the start of the backswing.

You see how David moves his upper body a little "under" the plane on the way back to give him a bit more turn . . . the schimmy drill is there to stop that - hence the reason why Brad's swing is shorter - but has the same amount of shoulder turn.

Again - you cannot seriously think his COG is on his left side.

virge666
15th May 2008, 10:13 PM
you can TURN your back to it (pun intended. ;)), but you are missing out on 10% extra power and ... you'd be reverse pivotting. :razz:

Ahh a reference to Mike Austin . . he was referring to a single action pivot with no weight shift or turning the RIGHT HIP BEHIND THE NAVEL . . to which he replied "There is no Power there"

here is the video and I agree with all of it.

http://www.mikeaustingolf.com/video/at_the_top.wmv

No good golfer does this - Edwin or otherwise.

but - if you want to still make more stuff up - feel free to be shot down at every point.

b1_
15th May 2008, 10:13 PM
It isn't about what you can control - it is a power source. And what I have been taught over the years and I tend to agree with is that the power sources have to be directly attached to the club, and the rest sort of have a supporting role.

Like an engine being THE ONLY power source in a car - but without suspension in the car - you cannot use ALL of that power without the car skipping along the road.

I use to think the pivot helped out a lot but really it just helps to load the other 4 power sources. The feeling of your upper body getting your arms moving is actually the power source # 4.

Well, I think my argument is, if the action of turning your wrists to get the club face square to the ball is a power source, it would be like saying the thrust from the exhaust pipe is a power source of a car, to use your analogy.

If you're saying that somehow it contributes to power in some holistic way then you could argue that your little toe is a power source as well. Just not convincing on the face of it. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding though.

Jono
15th May 2008, 10:14 PM
Again - you cannot seriously think his COG is on his left side.

Of course I can. LOOK at the picture. The heavy part of the body (ie. legs and hips) are to the left of the mid line. His arse has moved to the left. If he lost control of his bowel motion right there, the shit would land LEFT of the mid line.

However, since you think weight shift is irrelevant, this wouldn't matter to you, right? :roll:

mikezone13
15th May 2008, 10:15 PM
Let's be honest, all we really want to know is which swing of those two hits the ball furthest ;)

But continue the debate by all means!

virge666
15th May 2008, 10:21 PM
If you're saying that somehow it contributes to power in some holistic way then you could argue that your little toe is a power source as well. Just not convincing on the face of it. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding though.

Mate - I ain't going to re invent the wheel here - it is a power source. It ain't a big one but it is a power source. Much the same way a draw goes further than a fade . . all occurs due to that little power source.

Agueing with this is like saying the world is flat - it ain't a debate, it is a well know fact as has been since the 1960's.

More information here. look for hinge actions

http://www.brianmanzella.com/index.php?categoryid=17

Jono
15th May 2008, 10:21 PM
Let's be honest, all we really want to know is which swing of those two hits the ball furthest ;)

But continue the debate by all means!

If Lamb can maintain his arm motion, then add a well timed weight shift, he can increase his clubhead speed by up to 10%.

If your weight shift blocks or hinders your arm motion, then it is useless and counter productive.

IMO, if you learn a good weight shift and practice it regularly, it can be just as repeatable as a non weight shift swings such as Lamb's.

markTHEblake
15th May 2008, 10:24 PM
The butt weighs heaps

especially around here - present company excluded of course.

virge666
15th May 2008, 10:29 PM
Of course I can. LOOK at the picture. The heavy part of the body (ie. legs and hips) are to the left of the mid line. His arse has moved to the left. If he lost control of his bowel motion right there, the shit would land LEFT of the mid line.


Thankyou . . .

I have now proven that you should not use weight or weight shift in the context of the golf swing. You end up splitting hairs based on something that is totally irrelivant and making up stupid percentages that mean absolutley nothing.

While ignoring the important bits like . . .

HOW GOOD IS THAT TURN !!!

virge666
15th May 2008, 10:33 PM
If Lamb can maintain his arm motion, then add a well timed weight shift, he can increase his clubhead speed by up to 10%.


How does moving the weight over the right side add power to the golf swing . . . surely it is the move to the left side that loads the arms on the down swing ?

I am starting to get the feeling you are just regurgitating book passages that sort of make sense to you but you don't really understand the why and what fors. . . i know you have a good swing, I know you have some idea - but you just keep coming up with all these assumptions of teh schimmy and Brad not having a weight shift and turning behind his navel and this idea that a weight shift to the RIGHT gives you up to 10% more swing speed.

So far you have just ridicluled without any reasoning . . . and it is starting to get boring.

So if you could just come to the party with something other than weight shift to the right is really important cause you will get up to 10% more swing speed, it would be gosh darn just peachy,

Jono
15th May 2008, 10:42 PM
How does moving the weight over the right side add power to the golf swing . . . surely it is the move to the left side that loads the arms on the down swing ?

If you move to the right side, you have more room to move to the left. More shift is not necessarily better, but you need SOME shift to utilize the weight transfer effectively.

OK, Virge. It is obvious that you and I are never going to see this eye to eye. You ask the question where does the power come from and I have offered some scientific data on that subject. The figure of 10% from weight shift is not from me. It's from Jorgensen's calculations using complex equations based on a 3 lever model.

3oneday
16th May 2008, 06:17 AM
Maybe Toms does it better than Lamb then ? ;)



$$$$$$$$$

Jono
16th May 2008, 06:18 AM
OK, Virge. Here's something practical you can do.

I found a swing clip of you when we held that big ISG day at Eastlake.

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/9135/virgelambll3.jpg

I've got you side by side with Lamb. Very different top of backswing position, isn't it? More specifically, I want to look at the weight distribution. You'd have to be blind not to see that you have more weight on your right foot than Lamb. Just forget the fact that you think it is irrelevant. Do you agree?

Now, try to swing like Lamb. Get into his backswing position, especially his weight distribution. I don't care whether you focus on the turn and the weight distribution happens as a result. Video yourself and do this midline test to see that you are doing it right. When you finally have it, let us know what the distance loss was. ;)

3oneday
16th May 2008, 06:19 AM
Virge... you look..... shorter :lol:

virge666
16th May 2008, 07:42 AM
If you move to the right side, you have more room to move to the left. More shift is not necessarily better, but you need SOME shift to utilize the weight transfer effectively.


Yep - you need a shift to the LEFT to load the arms on the downswing.

In a left side swing you do it with a small shift and clearing the hips.
In a hitting hitting swing pattern - you shift accross the line (closed hips)
In a right sided swing - you do a mixture of both - called "The Bump"



OK, Virge. It is obvious that you and I are never going to see this eye to eye. You ask the question where does the power come from and I have offered some scientific data on that subject. The figure of 10% from weight shift is not from me. It's from Jorgensen's calculations using complex equations based on a 3 lever model.

No problem - but you have not offered scientific data - you have offered a quote from a book with out any explaination or show of understanding.

The weight shift to the left in all it forms "cocks" the hands and prepares it for the "Release", the release is the "Uncocking and rolling of the wrists" (Power source 4 - thats for you B1)

Any good golf swing with have a bump in one form or another.

Lets take a look at impact - attached picture.

Toms clears the hips and KEEPS THEM LEVEL. This in turn spins the rest of his body till finally his wrists attached to the club release through the ball.

Brad is different - His bump is not as pronouced and his left hip goes a little higher as they clear - his right hip DOES not go down, his left stays high. This creates a nice little angle to leverage the arms against. and in turn leverage the club against that. That is your 3 levers.

As you can also see the body position Brad has more weight on his left side THROUGH IMPACT which is way more important than your idea of shifting to the right side on the backswing.

They both retain the angles on the downswing and they both hit the ball a mile.

virge666
16th May 2008, 07:52 AM
OK, Virge. Here's something practical you can do.

I found a swing clip of you when we held that big ISG day at Eastlake.

When you finally have it, let us know what the distance loss was. ;)

You just cannot let go of this shift to the right can you...

Easy explaination.

That swing is Virge trying to rope hook a driver 300m to drive the green. That swing has everything - I have lost the left arm, I have turned way behind it trying to get distance and if you look at the down swing I have flipped 7 colours of shit out of it.

That is pretty much what I did when I was a junior trying to get some distance. And I still do it now. Especially when I move to the right on the backswing and stay there. Love that one . . . that shot goes left of left.

Sorry - what was you point here ? Oh yeah - distance loss. By memory I think I hit that one pretty well - I timed the flip and hit a high draw. (flip hook)

Also by memory I tried that again on 7th and the 14th. I think I got one of them and the other was about 210m in the crap on the left. Double bogeyed that hole and 2/3rd of my handicap was gone.

Top way to play golf that . . .

virge666
16th May 2008, 07:53 AM
Virge... you look..... shorter :lol:

I thought you weren't reading this stuff.



OK, Virge. It is obvious that you and I are never going to see this eye to eye.


We see eye to eye already - I know exactly what you are saying, I know exactly why you think it is important.

The difference is that you believe that the weight shift can only happen one way - and you ignore more important issues to facilitate it. Issues such as;

1. The different setup positions and that effect on weight shift
2. The direction of turn from both players
3. The rotation of the arms on the backswing
4. The different hip actions in both swing.

THE BODY ANGLES CREATED !!!

You are sitting there drawing lines on a picture and counting pixels on either side of a line to establish if someone has moved or shifted their weight to the right, whilst ignoring the important parts like the amount of lag or "store-up" created.

It is too analytical as people have different kinds of swings. you cannot just tick a box called weight shift and move to the next part. You have to look at a swing sequence and work out how he hits the ball and then work backwards. You cannot use Jack Nicklaus sequence to fix Lee Trevino's swing. Lee was a hitter and also did not shift his weight as per your criteria

And FFS you are meant to be a scientist . . . You have made observations that are plain wrong trying to justify a mentor's image. And then shown a lack of understanding of what your mentor's single axis pivot is. (Hips behind navel) If a student made your observations on hip turn and sweeping genralisations about a 10% swing speed increase - you would also shoot them down in flames at every point.

So I am with you all the way - I just hate the way you analyse a golf swing.

3oneday
16th May 2008, 08:03 AM
I thought you weren't reading this stuff.pictures are OK ;)

Oh, and 1 sentence replies :lol:

virge666
16th May 2008, 08:23 AM
pictures are OK ;)

Oh, and 1 sentence replies :lol:


Righto - well I have umm right-royally screwed that up.

:)

Courty
16th May 2008, 08:28 AM
They both retain the angles on the downswing and they both hit the ball a mile.

:shock: Are we talking about the same David Toms here?
The one who's Tied for 171st in Driving Distance, which is shorter than Nick O'Hern?

virge666
16th May 2008, 08:30 AM
:shock: Are we talking about the same David Toms here?
The one who's Tied for 171st in Driving Distance, which is shorter than Nick O'Hern?


I think that sequence is from about 1998 or 99 - back when he was a lot younger.

He was a lot longer back then before grey pubic hair.

i could have used Hank Kuhene if you like . . .

markTHEblake
16th May 2008, 09:52 AM
I cant get over those socks.

virge666
16th May 2008, 10:12 AM
I cant get over those socks.

And I don't expect you to, no matter how pretty you teeth are.

markTHEblake
16th May 2008, 10:18 AM
Fair enough.

http://bestuff.com/images/images_of_stuff/210x600/ugly-woman-12424.jpg

3oneday
16th May 2008, 10:49 AM
You dog.

Iain
16th May 2008, 03:12 PM
Looks like Virge is talking to himself in this thread!!

b1_
16th May 2008, 04:10 PM
Mate - I ain't going to re invent the wheel here - it is a power source. It ain't a big one but it is a power source. Much the same way a draw goes further than a fade . . all occurs due to that little power source.

Agueing with this is like saying the world is flat - it ain't a debate, it is a well know fact as has been since the 1960's.

More information here. look for hinge actions

http://www.brianmanzella.com/index.php?categoryid=17

Despite the fact that we are now mates ;) I'm still not convinced. Linking to a youtube golf coach isn't exactly definitive. I watched his first lesson but didn't see any mention of power coming from wrist turn.

And my understanding was that slices did not travel as far as hooks because a slice has more backspin so doesn't roll on?

I wouldn't call myself an expert (and yet I still like to debate/argue) but thinking logically all you have to do is time the transition of the club face from open to closed in a golf swing then replicate this 90 degree twist while dangling the club from a vertical grip - you're not going to get even half a meter from rotating (edit: removed word 'flipping') the face into a ball, and so my argument that it's not worth mentioning.

In fact I argue it's damaging to propagate the idea that there's any benefit from rotating (edit: removed word 'flipping') the golf face faster into the ball because then beginners try to incorporate it into their golf swing, which if tried would more likely dishearten because it is something that would be difficult for even a pro to master.

A quote from my one and only source of golf expertise as you already know Virge Joe Dante's 4 Magic Moves Chapter 2 (http://www.newgolfswing.com/newgolfswing03.php)


(Do not) "Pronate your wrists." This one is very nearly dead, but we are including it so we can give it a final kick and send it, we hope, to its grave. Pronation was the name given by the old pros to rolling the wrists into the shot at impact with the ball. The idea was that on the backswing the wrists were rolled to the right, opening the club face, and then rolled back to the left on the downswing to close it, or bring it square to the ball. It was also generally accepted that pronation not only squared the face of the club but also added distance to the shot because the club head was turning over toward the ball at impact. Most of the great golfers in the early years of the century used this action, many of them superlatively well. But it is worth noting that none of those players, Vardon included, were as consistent in their scoring as the top pros of today. The pronating of the wrists had to be timed to a nicety, obviously, if the ball were to be struck squarely. A little too much rolling, or too early, brought a hook or a smother; not enough left the face open and produced a slice. The best that can be said for pronation is that it is a great way to live dangerously.

From personal experience I know I never put any effort into rotating my wrists on the downswing. It's almost feels like the club face comes around by itself. In fact it would be desirable to keep the club face square to the ball all the way through the back swing from an accuracy standpoint, the only reason we don't do this is because we would not be able to get the club back as far without snapping our wrists off. And so we open the club face bringing it flat to the plane of the swing at the top because that is what the wrists dictate; it's the next best thing as long as everything stays in the plane of the swing.

Are we really talking about the same thing here? I'm starting to wonder.

EDIT:
Removed all reference to the word 'flipping' because it means something else in the golf swing, namely club head in front of hands on downswing.

3oneday
16th May 2008, 04:13 PM
Jesus, a third has joined the throng....

Isn't there a www.longwindedpostsforum.com somewhere ?

Iain
16th May 2008, 04:19 PM
Despite the fact that we are now mates ;) I'm still not convinced. Linking to a youtube golf coach isn't exactly definitive. I watched his first lesson but didn't see any mention of power coming from wrist turn.

And my understanding was that slices did not travel as far as hooks because a slice has more backspin so doesn't roll on?

I wouldn't call myself an expert (and yet I still like to debate/argue) but thinking logically all you have to do is time the transition of the club face from open to closed in a golf swing then replicate this 90 degree twist while dangling the club from a vertical grip - you're not going to get even half a meter from flipping the face into a ball, and so my argument that it's not worth mentioning.

In fact I argue it's damaging to propagate the idea that there's any benefit from flipping the golf face because then beginners try to incorporate flipping into their golf swing, which if tried would more likely dishearten because it is something that would be difficult for even a pro to master.

Who's talking about a flip?? Not Virge, he's talking about rolling the wrists, as the club comes down, unless you have a very strong grip (with the face pointing at the ball coming down into impact), your hands have to roll somewhat to square the club face.


A quote from my one and only source of golf expertise as you already know Virge Joe Dante's 4 Magic Moves Chapter 2 (http://www.newgolfswing.com/newgolfswing03.php)

From personal experience I know I never put any effort into rotating my wrists on the downswing. It's almost feels like the club face comes around by itself. In fact it would be desirable to keep the club face square to the ball all the way through the back swing from an accuracy standpoint, the only reason we don't do this is because we would not be able to get the club back as far without snapping our wrists off. And so we open the club face bringing it flat to the plane of the swing at the top because that is what the wrists dictate; it's the next best thing as long as everything stays in the plane of the swing.

Are we really talking about the same thing here? I'm starting to wonder.I don't think it is something that should be actively tried, as it can lead to a lot of inconsistencies in shot direction, but it has to happen, unless like I say, you have a very strong grip.

markTHEblake
16th May 2008, 04:25 PM
Jesus, a third has joined the throng....

i am only wondering - if i understood any of it, would I be a better golfer?

b1_
16th May 2008, 04:31 PM
Who's talking about a flip?? Not Virge, he's talking about rolling the wrists, as the club comes down, unless you have a very strong grip (with the face pointing at the ball coming down into impact), your hands have to roll somewhat to square the club face.

Ignore the word 'flipping' if it puts you off. Flipping is just my way of describing rolling the wrists with effort. Of course the wrist roll has to happen, just don't try and tap into any extra power there.

virge666
16th May 2008, 04:33 PM
Linking to a youtube golf coach isn't exactly definitive.


Brian is a TGM coach - nice guy and good vids. his video on flipping is excellent. I have met and worked with some of these guys, they are not just YouTube coaches for mine.



I watched his first lesson but didn't see any mention of power coming from wrist turn.


Look up Hinge actions. (Horizontal, Angled and Verticle) Chuck Evans and a guy called Yoda also do some excellent vids on it.



And my understanding was that slices did not travel as far as hooks because a slice has more backspin so doesn't roll on?


Umm - Yes and No, yes that is the result, it is how it happens that you are missing.



you're not going to get even half a meter from flipping the face into a ball, and so my argument that it's not worth mentioning.


You are not flipping - you are rotating - HUGE DIFFERENCE.
Go and YouTube Tiger front on from swingvision. Watch his hands release and watch how little arm movement there is. Welcome to Power Source #4



In fact I argue it's damaging to propagate the idea that there's any benefit from flipping the golf face


I agree - no one would teach flipping. Again it ain't flipping - it is rotating. With flipping the right shoulder stops and the hands flip - in a release the right shoulder keepos moving - look at Annika's swing to see it exagerated.

And Flipping is bloody easy - and decent golfer can do it on demand for a bit of extra distance and UN-controllable hook.



A quote from my one and only source of golf expertise as you already know Virge Joe Dante's 4 Magic Moves Chapter 2 (http://www.newgolfswing.com/newgolfswing03.php)


Depends on the swing sequence - Joe likes what is called an angled hinge action. It doesn't go as far as a horizontal hinge action... so you can make up your own mind on that one. (You will need to learn about hinge actions for that one, very worthwhile IMO)



Are we really talking about the same thing here? I'm starting to wonder.

Yep - you just need some more research. But happy to help out.

lastly.

Go and hit some balls. hit some without rotating the hands through impact and then hit some with a VERY active rotation of the hands through impact. You tell me which goes further.

Short enough answer 3 ?

virge666
16th May 2008, 04:42 PM
Ignore the word 'flipping' if it puts you off. Flipping is just my way of describing rolling the wrists with effort. Of course the wrist roll has to happen, just don't try and tap into any extra power there.

Look up hinge actions - you will learn a truck load - especially with short game. And look at Chuck Evans demonstrating the Power Source #4 again - it goes way further than 1m

Enjoy

Jono
16th May 2008, 05:40 PM
We see eye to eye already - I know exactly what you are saying, I know exactly why you think it is important.

The difference is that you believe that the weight shift can only happen one way - and you ignore more important issues to facilitate it. Issues such as;
bla bla bla

THE BODY ANGLES CREATED !!!

You are sitting there drawing lines on a picture and counting pixels on either side of a line to establish if someone has moved or shifted their weight to the right, whilst ignoring the important parts like the amount of lag or "store-up" created.

It is too analytical as people have different kinds of swings. you cannot just tick a box called weight shift and move to the next part. You have to look at a swing sequence and work out how he hits the ball and then work backwards. You cannot use Jack Nicklaus sequence to fix Lee Trevino's swing. Lee was a hitter and also did not shift his weight as per your criteria

And FFS you are meant to be a scientist . . . You have made observations that are plain wrong trying to justify a mentor's image. And then shown a lack of understanding of what your mentor's single axis pivot is. (Hips behind navel) If a student made your observations on hip turn and sweeping genralisations about a 10% swing speed increase - you would also shoot them down in flames at every point.

So I am with you all the way - I just hate the way you analyse a golf swing.

If you want to debate the scientific method, let's do it. NONE of what you have shown me is either scientific or logical. You draw lines haphazardly then argue, "see? his weight's gone to the right of my line so he's shifted his weight". I've merely done something a little more systematic by actually measuring the distance between his ankles. You seem to like drawing lines in your video analysis yet shun lines that have been measured. Curious response, I must say.

So you want me to start analysing the stuff out of Jorgensen's stuff? Do you have the background in mathematics to understand the lagrangian method? Why don't you pick up a copy of his book "The Physics of Golf" yourself? You say I merely quote without showing understanding, yet you haven't shown any proof that you have even read the thing. :roll: Do yourself a favour and get a copy. He explains things in layman's terms so you should be able to understand. He is a man of science. Homer is not.

You say you hate the way I analyse ... I hate the way you assume things and make unfounded deductions. I hate the way you try to make it sound scientific and logical but it's full of "pseudo-science".

I have simply singled out the topic of weight shift. I agree that measuring pixels between two lines is not the best method, but it's way better than drawing "false lines". Those green lines you drew in your weight shift analysis doens't tell you anything.

It's easy to get lost in arguments saying that people have different kinds of swing etc. Be more systematic. Weight destribution between two feet is a reflection of the weight relative to the mid sagital plane between the two feet. Period. Doesn't matter what kind of swing you have. You're stuck your head so far up Homer's arse that you can not see simple logic.

Shame.

Jono
16th May 2008, 05:53 PM
Easy explaination.

That swing is Virge trying to rope hook a driver 300m to drive the green. That swing has everything - I have lost the left arm, I have turned way behind it trying to get distance and if you look at the down swing I have flipped 7 colours of shit out of it.

That is pretty much what I did when I was a junior trying to get some distance. And I still do it now. Especially when I move to the right on the backswing and stay there. Love that one . . . that shot goes left of left.

Sorry - what was you point here ? Oh yeah - distance loss. By memory I think I hit that one pretty well - I timed the flip and hit a high draw. (flip hook)

Also by memory I tried that again on 7th and the 14th. I think I got one of them and the other was about 210m in the crap on the left. Double bogeyed that hole and 2/3rd of my handicap was gone.

Top way to play golf that . . .

In that video clip, you didn't move right and stayed there. You shifted to your right foot on the backswing and then shifted to your left on the downswing.

My point was for you to get your top of backswing position in similar weight distribution as Lamb (which it isn't in that video clip). ie. don't move your weight to the right. Now can show me a video of yourself in Lamb-like weight distribution at the top without losing any distance?

virge666
16th May 2008, 06:08 PM
In that video clip, you didn't move right and stayed there. You shifted to your right foot on the backswing and then shifted to your left on the downswing.


Show impact - I am miles behind it with a big leg drive

Show the frame after impact - FLIP !!!



My point was for you to get your top of backswing position in similar weight distribution as Lamb (which it isn't in that video clip). ie. don't move your weight to the right. Now can show me a video of yourself in Lamb-like weight distribution at the top without losing any distance?

No prob - how do I show a lack of distance loss ?

Actually I can do this with my little radar thingy. OK will do on Thursday night.

virge666
16th May 2008, 06:47 PM
I have simply singled out the topic of weight shift. I agree that measuring pixels between two lines is not the best method, but it's way better than drawing "false lines". Those green lines you drew in your weight shift analysis doesn't tell you anything.


Once again you miss the point.

I don't give a rat's arse about weight shift, you and You alone keep telling me that weight shift TO THE RIGHT is important. I keep telling you that it isn't, I keep saying that TURN on the backswing is where the magic is. You keep counting pixels on the screen talking about weight shift.

WHY IS THE WEIGHT SHIFT TO THE RIGHT IMPORTANT ?
Your answer - so you can shift more weight to the left on the downswing?

So Darren Clarke wanders in one day and asks for advice. You say Darren - you need to shift more weight to the right side on the backswing. Why says Darren. Because you will get up to 10% more power says you. How says Darren . . . well, if your hips don't get in the way on the downswing, you can shift more weight into the ball on the downswing.

But that changes the direction of my turn and my angle of attack into the ball, and because I am a BODY release - I am more than likely going to block it right or hit it more left than is usually humanly possible. But that is what long drivers do . . .says you... I am not a Long Driver says Darren, I play golf.

WEIGHT SHIFT IS VARIABLE . . .TURN ISN'T

Weightshift to the RIGHT is important in your swing sequence, also in Bobby Jones, Sam Snead, Monty, Sabbatini, Bubba Watson and others . . . . . it isn't in Brad's or Trevino or Peter Lonard or Peter OMalley or Ben Hogan or Moe Norman or Darren Clarke or Retief Goosen and many more.

But ALL OF THEM and I mean ALL OF THEM - turn and direction of the turn is vital. hence the reason I will never be sitting there counting pixels and pointing out weight shift, when I can see how a player moves his shoulders around his lower body.

Hence the reason I don't care about weight shift to the right on the backswing. It is not important. if you turn correctly - it takes care of itself.

if you want to talk about weight shift or BUMP to start the downswing - then we may be on the same page. Your sequence is going to shift a lot - we are not going to shift much. And we are both going to hit it the same relative distance

Brad is in the top 50 in driving distance on the Nationwide tour with an average of 288 yards which is 1 yard less than Appleby. These two both shift weight differently, but both their turns are awesome.


Sorry 3.

Jono
16th May 2008, 07:32 PM
FFS, Virge ... You like the sound of your voice too much ... even as you type. :roll:

I don't care what you think the merits of the weight shift is.

In your video, you specifically said, "a good turn naturally causes the weight shift". My diagrams show that statement to be false.

No more talk from you. Get to it with the video. I want a top of backswing position like Lambs. We will do a top of backswing comparison. I can measure your clubhead speed and ball speed.

What about this? You use your "I don't give a rat's arse about weight shift" swing and I use my "love my weight shift" swing and see who gets higher clubhead speed and ball speed reading. We'll video tape our swings and record the speed results. You can't cheat and shift to the right like you did in that clip. You gotta swing like Lamb. Deal?

Jono
16th May 2008, 08:00 PM
Show impact - I am miles behind it with a big leg drive

Show the frame after impact - FLIP !!!



No prob - how do I show a lack of distance loss ?

Actually I can do this with my little radar thingy. OK will do on Thursday night.

http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/5058/virgetopandimpactne4.jpg

Facts don't lie. Golfer's interpretations do.

You want to play with terms like body release, hand release, go ahead. IMO, that's a total waste of time. Unless you can prove to me that certain players don't use muscles of the hands and forearms and some people do, they are just useless terminologies. They have done EMG studies on pro golfers and the firing patterns look remarkably similar from one pro to the next. Nothing to suggest one is a hitter and the other is a swinger, nothing to suggest one is a body releaser and the other is a hand releaser.

I am interested in finding out what is an efficient swing and can maximise power AND maximise accuracy. Pros are already at top level with what they have. Why on earth would you think that I would want to teach a pro? I'm just stating that weight shift per se, can add around 10% to the clubhead speed. Note the word CAN. If you look at Jorgensens reasoning and calculations, the shift has to occur at the right time.

Now, I have promised Jarro that I'll stop talking about this. If you are keen to meet up at a driving range to do our experiment, I'm keen. Macquarie range is good because you can see where the ball lands. Can't do this weekend and I'm working next weekend, but I can do weekend after that.

virge666
17th May 2008, 05:20 PM
You gotta swing like Lamb. Deal?

If only I could . . . but as close as i can.

Deal.

virge666
17th May 2008, 05:22 PM
In your video, you specifically said, "a good turn naturally causes the weight shift". My diagrams show that statement to be false.


No they don't . . .

Jono
17th May 2008, 05:57 PM
No they don't . . .

yep, they do. you just have to look.

When do you want to meet up at the range? can you make it to the Macquarie Uni driving range one Saturday or Sunday? I'll bring my camera, and the radars for both clubhead and ball speeds.

Jarro
17th May 2008, 06:01 PM
If these pair of antagonists meet at a range somewhere, can somebody else please go along to ensure there isn't a punchup :roll:

Grunt
17th May 2008, 06:10 PM
I will do my best and will take my vid camera too, not for the swings but the fight.

markTHEblake
17th May 2008, 06:17 PM
If these pair of antagonists meet at a range somewhere, can somebody else please go along to ensure there isn't a punchup :roll:

i think they are close freinds. How else could it have gone that far without a hissy fit.

Jarro
17th May 2008, 06:20 PM
i think they are close freinds. How else could it have gone that far without a hissy fit.

So far it's been a battle of the brains.

That's why golfer69 hasn't poked his head in here

virge666
17th May 2008, 06:40 PM
When do you want to meet up at the range? can you make it to the Macquarie Uni driving range one Saturday or Sunday?

Maybe - I am better on a week night - say a Friday night ?

Mac Uni is around an hour away . . depending on traffic, and I don't spend enough time with the family anyway.

But yeah - lets do it.

3oneday
17th May 2008, 06:46 PM
A whole day and this page hasn't even been finished... buncha girls :p

virge666
17th May 2008, 06:47 PM
A whole day and this page hasn't even been finished... buncha girls :p

Sorry, but I am VERY hung over . . .

Jono
17th May 2008, 06:58 PM
Maybe - I am better on a week night - say a Friday night ?

Mac Uni is around an hour away . . depending on traffic, and I don't spend enough time with the family anyway.

But yeah - lets do it.

Mate, I'm in Wollongong during the week. It'd be better to do it during the day so we can see where the ball lands. What I'd like to do is to get you to swing like Lamb and record a video and measure your clubhead speed. Then I'll get you to let it loose and hit it as far as you can and again record your swing and the clubhead speed. Crude experiment, but it should yield some interesting results.

See if you can spare a few hours one weekend. Let me know.

virge666
18th May 2008, 08:27 AM
See if you can spare a few hours one weekend. Let me know.

No wuckers.

Jono
18th May 2008, 09:17 AM
We can go to Narrabeen if you like, but this won't show you where the ball is landing.

It'll have to be on a weekend.

virge666
18th May 2008, 12:48 PM
You and I both know that range balls are crap anyway... their spin rate is too high to show distance. The radar is always going to be better. Which one do you have ?

What we should do is head down to the 1st at Bayview which is where we have a practice driving range. My shag bag is full of ProV1's we can mark them and do video. Should be able to hit everything bar the driver . . . we could use the 2nd tee for that.

Whatcha reckon ?

Jono
18th May 2008, 01:30 PM
You and I both know that range balls are crap anyway... their spin rate is too high to show distance. The radar is always going to be better. Which one do you have ?

What we should do is head down to the 1st at Bayview which is where we have a practice driving range. My shag bag is full of ProV1's we can mark them and do video. Should be able to hit everything bar the driver . . . we could use the 2nd tee for that.

Whatcha reckon ?

That sounds good, Virge. Do they allow you to hit on the 1st during the weekends? 2nd would be more ideal, IMO.

I've got the Swing Speed Radar plus the Pure Contact from Zelocity. SSR is not really geared towards measuring the ball speed. Pure Contact is very accurate and compares well to the ball speed figures you get on Vector.

http://www.zelocity.com/golf/purecontact.shtml

virge666
18th May 2008, 03:23 PM
I've got the Swing Speed Radar plus the Pure Contact from Zelocity.

I have the Pure Contact also . . . real good kit - but stupidly expensive.

no prob with a Sunday arvo. We can pretty much have most of the holes on the front nine... just depends on how busy we are on that arvo.

Should be fine though.

3oneday
18th May 2008, 04:45 PM
It'll take you guys an hour to get set up with all the crap you both have ! :lol:

virge666
18th May 2008, 06:30 PM
It'll take you guys an hour to get set up with all the crap you both have ! :lol:

yeah - that whole "putting it on the ground" thing will really take a long time . . . though we may have to put it in a direction, but I think we can sort it out.

3oneday
18th May 2008, 06:46 PM
yeah - that whole "putting it on the ground" thing will really take a long time . . .that's cause only you and Jono know what the **** each of you is talking about half the time :lol:

TheNuclearOne
2nd February 2009, 10:33 AM
So how did this get together go and what were the results?

3oneday
2nd February 2009, 11:01 AM
Jono got married and only uses one stick these days.

henno
2nd February 2009, 11:06 AM
Jono got married and only uses one stick these days.

Once a year? On his birthday?

haysey
2nd February 2009, 12:09 PM
Gawd help me. I thought I was confused before. I've got no ****ing idea now


<wanders off to shoot self in head>




:wink: