Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Does this prove the 'Fall' In the early downswing?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Cally
    commented on 's reply
    I agree Kid that we are likely closer to a semi-permanent habitation on the Moon than many realize. I heard our VP announce a couple weeks ago that the plan is to send another man and the first woman to the Moon in 2024. And I saw an article saying that they would be the first humans to set foot on the Moon's South Pole. It wouldn't surprise me if we see a golf shot or two while they are there. Also I understand there are plans for a manned mission to Mars in the 2030's.

    And thanks for your answer on Gravity in Space. I thought there was gravity in space, just not what we have here on Earth. I guess we better get working on some limited gravity golf balls!

  • Schrodinger
    replied
    Just thinking about other analogies where the kinetic sequence might not fit WIG and one of them is throwing a frisbee with your lead arm . Because the arm is horizontal , there is no need for a 'fall' so one is actually practicing an OTT move.

    Skipping a stone is also a bit precarious because its teaching a right hand flipping action. That is ideal if you are your trying to create speed when the distal segments of your body get progressively shorter in length but holding a golf club makes the most distal segment longer (so the kinetic sequence will have to be different).

    Baseball and tennis swings are similar to the 'frisbee' because the arms/club are swinging more flat and perpendicular to our pivot rotation (another OTT type move)

    The only real analogies we can use to feel the proper sequence of a WIG technique seems to be:

    1. Cutting grass with a grass whip.
    2. Throwing clubs to a target.

    Even the 'slashing of the sword' seems more applicable to those who have a strong lead hand grip (and inappropriate for those of us who prefer a neutral grip ).

    We might need to be a bit more careful about the analogies we might use to feel a 'WIG' type sequence.

    Leave a comment:


  • kid_fullerene
    replied
    Originally posted by Cally View Post
    Yes, lots of lunar craters. I believe they even name some of them after people.

    They would probably have to design a lunar crater wedge with a special sole and a super heavy shaft, otherwise one might be stuck in there all day long with a conventional sand wedge.
    Hi Cally

    we may yet live to see how your Namesake company deals with the 'Lunar Game' .. as we are likely closer to some kind of semi-permanent habitation of the Moon than anybody realizes. There are all kinds of surveys and very specific searches for water (probably at the Lunar South Pole) and ancient Lava tunnels that could be converted into some kind of base - a bit like what they did at Earth's North & South poles in the Ice about 50 years ago.





    Believe it or not - some of why we need to get there involves a specific isotope of Helium .. Helium 3 .. which opens a few doors to all sorts of progress



    https://www.explainingthefuture.com/helium3.html

    Not saying that this is going to happen tomorrow - but you can see that the build out is actually relatively achievable .. and it could also make an excellent power source for travel within the local solar system..

    wish I could claim credit for these flights of imagination .. but greater minds than mine blazed this trail generations ago..



    and is there Gravity in Space?

    the short answer is 'yes' ..but not necessarily in a way that is immediately conducive to proper golf .. but it will substantially rearrange our galaxy and the next one over some time from now..



    it the fullness of time .. what we knew will somehow be reworked entirely as part of a brand new shining structure .. that will also take shape under the rules explored by the likes of Newton, Einstein and Noether.. and rules that we do not yet know ..but suspect .. working from the minds of Hawking, Thorne, Cox, Feynman and Wheeler.

    hope my little Golf Course on Planet Crackpot will somehow survive it all ..

    we thought it through and parked it just inside a stable event horizon of a perfectly engineered black hole .. but these things on a cosmic scale.. they can just sort of have it their own way.. even Crackpot National Golf & CC (est. 2011) may need a bit of tweaking to deal with this proposed Galactic Merger.

    remind me to talk to the Board in about 3 Billion years.. figuring a 1 Billion Year Head Start probably gives us enough time to do some planning.

    I've been playing the Truvis Hearts.. but I'm thinking that Callaway could whip up some Truvis ChromeSofts with some Black Hole inspired graphics..



    cheers for now

    k_f

    maybe even lead to some proper golf on Mars.. Venus seems like a mistake.. and Jupiter might have a couple moons that could work .. but all in all is kind of a stretch for a weekend round.



    ​​​​​​​

    Leave a comment:


  • Cally
    commented on 's reply
    Yes, lots of lunar craters. I believe they even name some of them after people.

    They would probably have to design a lunar crater wedge with a special sole and a super heavy shaft, otherwise one might be stuck in there all day long with a conventional sand wedge.

  • Ken Robie
    commented on 's reply
    One big bunker!

  • Cally
    commented on 's reply
    I'm not an astronomer or a rocket scientist or even a high IQ individual so I would need Sir Fullerene to confirm this, but as far as the moon is concerned I think there is gravity, it's just a good bit less than what we have here on earth. So we might have to use heavier clubs to sense the gravity.

    At any rate, it's just not practical to play golf on the moon because it's much too long of a commute, and I hear that there aren't any flat lies up there . . . not even on the tee boxes, and the greens are horrendous to putt on.

  • Ken Robie
    commented on 's reply
    Ok then I contend that a W.I.G. swing is not possible in space!!!! NO GRAVITY!!! ;>)

  • Cally
    commented on 's reply
    I do think people can overdo this, i.e., the upper lead arm pinned against the chest. Initially in the transition the upper part of the lead arm would naturally be pinned against the chest if you lead with the lower body and leave the arms where they are at the top of the backswing, but I think the lead arm can be pinned there for too long into the downswing.

    At some point I believe the lead arm needs to move off of the chest rather than staying pinned to it as you rotate the torso in the downswing otherwise the arms could get stuck behind you or perhaps possible injury, as they said, could result.

    At any rate, if we let the arms fall in the initial part of the transition/downswing then the body can respond and rotate accordingly.

  • Schrodinger
    replied
    Here's a nice video showing that the golf scientists/biomechanics are delving into the shoulder joint vs ribcage movements in the golf swing



    Might help golfers who are flexible and losing power in their downswing but unsure how it would help someone as inflexible as me. I think I'd rather let my CNS do the physics for me :-)

    PS. Here is yet another video which confuses me even more.



    They are almost promoting an X-factor stretch in the downswing where the ribcage leads into the upper lead arm (ie.connection) for extra power but then he says if you overdo it then you can get a 'rotator cuff ' injury. Maybe John Dunigan got those 2 rotator cuff injuries trying to implement that 'power move', but its certainly something I don't want to happen to me.

    Here is a video that clearly shows that a lot more analysis needs to be done with regards what's happening at shoulder joint level. Shawn says that there is limited 5% movement of the shoulders when you grip a club in front of you and I suspect he is right for many of us who are inflexible, but maybe that doesn't necessarily apply to everyone , especially pga pros (who have been swinging since they were very young).

    Last edited by Schrodinger; 08-08-2019, 12:38 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Schrodinger
    commented on 's reply
    Hi Cally

    I agree with what you've said above.

    If I use my lower body (ie. the turntable) to turn my upper body to move my left shoulder socket, which will then pull on my left arm at the top of the backswing, its an OTT for me (because I have very little pelvic/torso separation). For me personally , when I do my perpetual motion swing, my body reacts to the swinging of my 'arms/club unit to target' exactly as per Shawn's recent video (Turbo Charge Your Swing For Way More Speed).

    If I let my arms fall or even better, assist the 'fall' with the 'Centrifugal Pump/Squat' , I do not go OTT. It's almost as if my CNS has figured out the 'physics' of the swing for my body (if I use the correct focus and intent).

    Looking at my swing from a physics standpoint , the arm and squat 'fall' (while the the wrists are cocked) will assist a straighter club path in the early to mid downswing and then help clubhead release (as my hands turns the corner). Remember that clubhead speed is dependent on hand speed and path. Pulling with the left shoulder socket (at top of backswing) using my pivot may feel powerful and initially create early hand speed but it will ruin my hand path which will ultimately affect my release (ie. clubhead speed probably peaking too soon in the downswing).

    As Costa has mentioned previously 'patience' is the key here because the impulse to 'pull with the arm using my left shoulder socket' from the top can be inexorable when you have max stretch (ie. X-factor). Maybe that's why its better to feel that one is swinging to the top with some engagement of the muscles but not maximum stretch and allow the 'fall/assisted fall' to happen first.
    Last edited by Schrodinger; 08-08-2019, 08:04 AM.

  • Cally
    commented on 's reply
    Schrodinger,

    Can we go back to this one part where you said if you "attempt to pull the arms down, that you can't prevent yourself from rotating your pelvis and upper torso together in the transition . . . ".

    I've found this to be true too and I think it's an important point because we want some degree of separation between the lower body and the upper body in the transition as we start the downswing. In other words, we don't want everything turning together. Shawn has described this as feeling the X-Factor in the Downswing where the lower body leads. But if we actively "pull' the arms in the transition we really can't lead with the lower body.

    Now I realize that some people are more flexible than others so the degree of leading with the lower body will vary from one person to another, but the point is that we don't want to "pull" with the arms and turn everything together in the transition. And I would say that for those who are less flexible and aren't as able to easily disassociate or separate the lower body from the upper torso in the transition that the "fall" of the arms is even more important.

    So in the transition if we do nothing with the arms and just allow them to simply "fall" rather than actively "pull" them then we can more easily get to the place as shown in the pictures you posted above where the hips/pelvis are square to the target line when the lead arm is horizontal to the ground.

    Do I have this right?

  • Schrodinger
    replied

    These weird 'fictitious' forces that you may feel (and see ) usually present themselves when you are actually in a 'non-inertial' frame of reference (ie. accelerating).

    Because your body is rotating (ie. lower torso/upper torso /arms /wrists/hands ) you can probably feel these forces (which are really reaction forces) but not actually see them (unless your moving body segments each had a pair of eyes). So yes , 'feel' might be different from one golfer to the next depending on how their body segments accelerate (I mean linearly and in rotation).

    Imho, feel is not real for 2 reasons.

    1. These fictitious forces (that seem 'real') - Centrifugal / Coriolis
    2. The time it takes for a sub-conscious action to be consciously felt. Example is in transition where you expect to feel the inertial pull/push of the clubhead in your hands at the top of the backswing but actually 'feel' that pull/push nearer impact. Giving you the false impression that you are applying pressure on the grip handle to make the clubhead move faster through impact (like a hockey slap shot).

    The point 2 example above is sometimes used by golf instruction to promote active wrist torque (later in the downswing and imho incorrectly for certain longer clubs) to create extra clubhead speed.

    Here is a good demonstration of the mysterious Coriolis force if your eyes were moving in a 'non-inertial frame for reference' (ie. rotation is an acceleration).





    Seems weird doesn't it ? As if there is a magical force curving the ball flight but its not real because there is no 'outside' force causing that curvature.
    Last edited by Schrodinger; 08-07-2019, 10:03 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • kid_fullerene
    commented on 's reply
    Cally - I love that reference .. I believe it's also mentioned in Golf in the Kingdom .. talking about Golf as the only game that has ever been played on another world.. I believe that Alan B. Shepard still holds the Course Record on Luna Golf & CC . So much from that time that continues to capture my imagination .. space exploration and the game of golf .. if there's a 'patron saint' of Crackpot National .. it should be ABS. so glad that you brought all that back! cheers k_f

  • Cally
    replied
    Neat video, and brilliant stuff Sir Fullerene!

    As to this . . .

    Originally posted by kid_fullerene View Post
    we've found ways to briefly escape this world we inhabit
    And even play a little golf during this brief escape . . .



    I think he hit it fat with a 6 iron . . . maybe he should have gone with a 7 iron.

    Leave a comment:


  • kid_fullerene
    replied
    Originally posted by Cally View Post
    Thanks Kid! So with inertia, it's all relative, based on our frame of reference! Is this a succinct summation of a very complex topic?

    BTW, since everything is always moving, even though we don't sense it, is anything ever really at rest, i.e., an object at rest stays at rest, as in Newton's First Law of Motion?
    Hi Cally

    it's a matter of perspective .. for example an object .. like a golf ball can be settled on the ground .. as it might have fallen/rolled to a resting position.. but the surface that it is on is travelling in a rotation, in an orbit, within a the motion of multiple stars and the rotation of the galaxy and of course the motion of the galactic clusters themselves.

    but within our space time.. determined by the masses that generate gravity and our ability to be in one place long enough to perceive 'time's arrow' .. we can interact with those same forces to add enough energy to our swings to transfer it to that very same golf ball .. and send it to where we intend.

    from our vantage point or frame of reference we see the ball fly and land .. but if we had the ability to view all the forces involved it would be much more complex.. Here's a way it could be described outside of the usual models..



    we've found ways to briefly escape this world we inhabit .. this protected area of localized greatest available mass.. it helps create our time . and gives us a safe place to look at and talk back to the universe around us.

    imagine that so many of the secrets of our universe are available to us with the extension of our arms and the drop of the mass at the end of a well made stick..

    cheers for now

    k_f

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X