Compression?

[John Graham]

You could build an iron byron to recreate Hinge Action Id imagine ........but it would have to have some #3 Accumulator Angle....... the grip in the left hand under the heal of the thumb pad instead of running up through the life line. ( like one does when putting ..........and why do we do that when we're putting? Because it deadens the send applied to the ball......by zeroing out the clubhead travel associated with any rolling of the left wrist. Giving every Hinge Action the clubhead travel of Angled Hinging .......which is zero) Its interesting to me that golfers commonly adopt this putting grip , sometimes even when chipping without any knowledge of why .......but the physics of it is there for the ball to react to.

If you want more info on #3 angle check out Ted Forts golf channel video......there's a part where he talks about "distal" acceleration as I recall. Imagine doing that with a putting grip and notice how it would accelerate the clubhead at all.

OB.

Interesting point.

If I remember correctly, the more #3 accumulator the more head travel for any forearm rotation. Am I saying that right?

So, for horizontal hinging which employs more #3 the club head is accelerating more then with vertical hinging?

Am I correct so far?

Would that mean that if I can accelerate the club more over a shorter time frame that I get more umf than going at a constant speed?

I hope I haven't just confused myself. Is this what you meant with your car analogy?

JG

[O.B.Left]

OB.

Interesting point.

If I remember correctly, the more #3 accumulator the more head travel for any forearm rotation. Am I saying that right?

So, for horizontal hinging which employs more #3 the club head is accelerating more then with vertical hinging?

Am I correct so far?

Would that mean that if I can accelerate the club more over a shorter time frame that I get more umf than going at a constant speed?

I hope I haven't just confused myself. Is this what you meant with your car analogy?

JG

The car analogy was a little different. It was more about assuming they ( beatle and 911) are going the same speed and then deducing they are equally powerful. They're different cars. For any given hand speed you get more clubhead speed with Horizontal.

The #3 angle is set when you grip the club really. So Horizontal and Vertical have the same amount of #3 angle. No difference there. But Horizontal (in simple terms) has the left arm rolling. Angled has it not rolling. Vertical has it reverse rolling. So Horizontal's clubhead travel is greater (than the other hinge actions) for any associated distance the hands travel . Vertical a reverse roll has the clubhead traveling less. Angled has zero cubhead hinge " travel".

Did i say that correctly ? Now Im getting confused.

Try this....hold out your left arm and hand as if to shake someones hand , now drop it down on the inclined plane. Now grip an imaginary golf club and take your hand back and forth a foot or so. No left arm roll equals Angled. Roll equals Horizontal , reverse roll is Vertical. Imagine how that change in roll changes the distance the head travels though your hands are only going back and forth a foot or so. Now adopt a putting grip with the club running up the life line.... hinging has zero influence clubhead speed, "zero travel" via a "zeroed #3 accumulator, just different clubface rotation.


So the hinge action employed influences clubhead speed and the rate of clubface closing and layback.

In regard to closing , the clubface is in the process of continuously closing through impact however brief that may be. The face will be more closed at separation than at impact unless impact is 0 seconds long. Same deal with layback, the clubface will be more lofted at separation. So the question is does this influence ball behaviour, compression? My chips and pitches suggest it does.

[John Graham]

Same deal with layback, the clubface will be more lofted at separation.

O.B.,

Am I understanding this quote correctly that when employing vertical hinging the clubface loft is increasing from impact to separation?

JG

[O.B.Left]

O.B.,

Am I understanding this quote correctly that when employing vertical hinging the clubface loft is increasing from impact to separation?

JG

Yes. Vertical Hinging is layback with no closing. Continuously. Although the collision does wreak havoc upon the underlying geometry and obscures things. The ball hits the face as hard as the face hits the ball.

Reverse it for horizontal .....closing only no layback. Two extremes. Two different ball responses. I do believe it effects ball response. Though the interval is short the dynamics are still present, you'd have to get impact to 0 seconds for it to not have an effect. Sort of like what part of curve is straight or ....

Hey man I wanna know about Aimpoint sometime.

Regards
OB.

[John Graham]

Yes. Vertical Hinging is layback with no closing. Continuously. Although the collision does wreak havoc upon the underlying geometry and obscures things. The ball hits the face as hard as the face hits the ball.

OB.

There are some major issues I have with this idea. With an iron, the ball hits the face below the cog and since momentum must be preserved, the clubhead is deflected lower at separation than it was at impact. It has to deflect downwards thus reducing loft.

Check out this video.

I'm guessing the first one is vertical hinging and you can see it deloft during the impact interval.

JG

[O.B.Left]

There are some major issues I have with this idea. With an iron, the ball hits the face below the cog and since momentum must be preserved, the clubhead is deflected lower at separation than it was at impact. It has to deflect downwards thus reducing loft.

Check out this video.

I'm guessing the first one is vertical hinging and you can see it deloft during the impact interval.

JG

Yes , the collision of impact does have an effect. Some of those look like toe or heal hits which have an effect on the face rotation. Same, as you say with low hits. These sorts of things are obvious to a good golfer , he can feel 'em. These impact dynamics are maybe outside of the real issue at hand in regard to hinge action "real or perceived". I strongly assert that it is very real. The ball rolls on the face. The point of contact for horizontal tends to stay intact whereas for vertical it tends to roll up the face. Loft angle dependent of course. Slow mo film clearly shows the ball climbing the face to my eye.

Without a ball / clubhead collision, the dynamics of hinge action would be readily apparent on film or to the golfer for that matter. Add the collision and things do get obscured on film but the geometry still stands to my mind. Im not a scientist but I do see the effect in my own shot making, thats my proof so to speak.

The ball compresses, rebounds, climbs the face all in a fraction of a second. Its amazingly brief but why discount what the clubface is doing during that time? There are two players, after all. Its not just the ball on its own doing all that, its an interaction.

[Daryl]

There are some major issues I have with this idea. With an iron, the ball hits the face below the cog and since momentum must be preserved, the clubhead is deflected lower at separation than it was at impact. It has to deflect downwards thus reducing loft.

Check out this video.

I'm guessing the first one is vertical hinging and you can see it deloft during the impact interval.

JG

You're observing the Clubface tilting under the Ball. That would be a Lob Shot. It's a special application of Vertical Hinging whose purpose is an almost total loss of compression.

The following quote describes the requirements for Maximum Compression "On the Line of Compression" that only Hinge Action can provide. The Line of Compression may be far from the center of the ball, but maximum compression for that "Line" can be gained by following the Instructions below.

2-C-0 LINEAR FORCE The ball will respond to non-linear (angular) force exactly the same as to linear forces only if the application produce forces equally linear to the ball but not necessarily linear to anything external to the ball.

Briefly stated, it is necessary to find a way to compress the ball through a particular point along a particular line, and maintain this compression through the same particular point along this same particular line straight line, through the entire arc of the Impact Interval, and with geometrical precision for consistent control. Study 2-K and 2-N.

To maintain compression at a particular point that point, then, must rotate around the same center that the rotating force does. Not just the physical center of the ball nor the gravitational center – just the point of compression. In other words, the original contact points of the Clubface and ball must remain in contact throughout the entire Impact Interval. This is possible only if the motion – or arc – is uniform. Therefore there must be a perfectly centered action – or a compensating manipulation.

Most people assume that the Ball "Rolls" up the face of the inclined striker. And, for most people it does and the result is Loss of Compression. Hinge Action Solves that problem by providing a means where-by the contact and separations point remains the same and there-by maximizing the amount of compression for any given Shot or, if you prefer, eliminating compression as with the "Lob Shot".

[John Graham]

I am talking about the loft of the face increasing during the impact. In every one of those irons shots, it is quite visible that the face is delofting upon impact (even the lob shot). Sure a bunch are miss hit and they also rotate.

Because the ball is going up, the face must be going down.

Where in 2-c-* is the CG of club head mentioned?

I can't find it.

Don't get me wrong. I am not saying hinge action can't happen.

Saying that the clubface is adding loft during impact is all I am discussing.