|
"Sustain the Lag" vs. "throwaway"
Quote:
"the kinetic link theory where there is a time-sequential transfer of energy that causes the pelvis to move first, the shoulders second, and the arms third with each sequentially moving part maximally rotating at exactly twice the speed of the preceding moving part"--Lag being thrownaway. |
COAM vs. golf swing
"COAM does not apply to the golf swing.":eyes:
It does, more or less!!:salut: |
Does not.
Angular momentum is not conserved in the golf swing Kinetic chain theory of momentum transfer is pretty much BS too. Its easily proven. Kinetic chain "snap" ... let just say if you believe that I've got some Florida waterfront for you. Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Ocean front property in Arizona sounds better....:happy3:
Not florida....:eyes: Oh and I would like it proven also. . |
Quote:
Stands for Conservation of Angular Momemtum (I alpha^2) where alpha is angular acceleration. At the top of the back swing... How much angular momentum is there? 1/3 of the way down.. How much? Half Way down? and at impact? Easy right? At the top there is none... zero... zip... nada. Things are stopped. 1/3 of the way down... There is some.. things have begun to move 1/2 way down... There's even more... now the golfswing is really picking up speed and starting to rotate fast. Finally at impact? Maximum momentum, maximum rotation *that is unless you subscribe to some ignoramus teacher's ridiculous theory of kinetic chain snapping in which case you've probably lurched yourself to a halt and incurred a mishit* If angular momentum is increasing as the downswing progress' all but the dimmest among us must agree, then by definition angular momentum it is NOT being conserved. (If as time progresses you have more or less of somthing it is NOT being conserved). COAM does not apply to the golfswing and I refer you to any physics or mechanics textbook if you disagree with this definition of COAM. Dante wrote a pretty good book back in the 60's (5 magic moves). In it he had stroboscopic pictures of one golfer whose hands slowed down before impact (they almost came to a halt in fact). Dante extrapolated from his sample of one (never a good thing to do btw) to all golfers. Since he did not know how to explain this observation himself, Dante consulted a physics teacher who told him the golfers hands slowed down because of COAM (sounds good in theory.... but wrong ... for the reason given above). Also note the: "Appeals to authority" logical fallacy. He's a physics teacher so he knows right? wrong. Perhaps Dante should have consulted with more experts to confirm the firsts explanation and golf instruction would not be mired in this COAM myth. Hind sight is of course 20-20. It turns out very few people swing a golf club like Dante's stoboscope model anyway. In fact Nesbit's data shows most golfers (especially the better ones) accelerate their hands all the way to impact. (See figure 4 http://www.motionanalysis.com/pdf/2005_nesbit.pdf ) BTW... Nesbit used the finest "3d machine" available to acquire his measurements. Some people choose to ignore that which does not fit their preconceived notions especially slayers of windmills. PS Check out fig. 7 of the linked pdf. That's angular velocity. For those who did not make it to (or forgot) calculus, the slope of that curve is angular acceleration. Note its increasing for all golfers right up to impact. Angular momentum IS NOT being conserved during the golf swing. Have a good day! |
Kinetic Chain momentum myth
Quote:
http://nmgolfscience.tripod.com/kinetic.htm |
Use e.g. a V1 software. Use the Spline feature. Use the same time intervals and mark hands position each time. You will see (no matter what golfer - used even Ben Hogan driver FO vid) that the hands are initially accelerating, then slowing a bit before coming into the impact zone.
I know that it's an imprecise tool but it rather confirms what Dante discovered, not your revelations, Nm. I am very objective. Try it yourself before you start negate what I tried. Cheers |
Darius J.
I believe Nesbit's test data not your V1 software spline feature. Drawing on stills or footage never made any sense to me anyway .... parallax etc. But you're free to believe what every you want to believe. There there are undoubtly some golfers who's hands slow down some (Nesbit measured some golfers whose hands did) but very very few golfers hands slow to the extent of Dante's stroboscope model. Its not worth my time discussing this hand speed issue anymore (as you know it was beat to death on that other forum).... the DATA speaks for itself and the DATA SAYS GOLFERS HANDS DO NOT NECESSARILY SLOW DOWN BEFORE IMPACT. (see figure 4 in linked pdf) Read Nesbit's comments on matter. Either you believe it or you don't end of story. Quote:
|
It's not the question of my belief. I always tried to be objective and love the objective truth. Thus, I take seriously Mr.Nesbit's researches as well as e.g. Mr.Dante's ones. However, there is no final evidence for one or the other theory - otherwise, the discussion on this or the other forum would not have been necessary.
You can laugh at my V1 trial - and I understand it because I myself stated that it's a imprecise tool - but, it shows what it shows. This is what I wanted to say, nothing more. Cheers |
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
Quote:
COAM has absolutely nothing to do with either the release in particular of the golf swing in general. Furhermore not all golfers hands slow dow before impact. Nesbits data proves it. These are statements of FACT not opinion. In otherwords that IS the truth but then some people cannot handle the truth, particulary if it does not fit with their preconceptions :) It doesn't matter to me what you or anyone else choose believe. Have a good weekend. :golf: |
OK, give me a link to a FO vid of a golfer that accelerates hands linear velocity - I'll convert it and compare to my YouTube findings. I am sure you know, at least, names of golfers whose hands are not slowing down. Have a great weekend too.
Cheers |
Quote:
|
nomind golfer
Quote:
appear to me you have limited knowledge to the golfswing, what also concerns me is you have never studied biomechanics, so with out measured data how can you make judgment, the body nor the arms continue to speed up in the golf swing. each body segment hits a peak speed and decelerates even the arms, at the point of impact all moving body parts are decelerating hips,shoulders arms and hands. I think you need to read 2-m-1 to learn and understand conservation of momentum in golf and 2-E it eludes me how you can past judgment when you have not data or background in golf biomechanics. I know for a fact you haven't cause if you did you would know all body segments accelerate, but before impact are all decelerating Then you would fully understand stand how coam works in the golf swing. what truth are you presenting, I swear you and jeff are mates , how can you present truth when you have no data or research in how the human body functions in the golf swing. your going off opinion not research or facts here. The body speeds up:laughing9 this is hilarious |
Blah Blah Blah more of the same from "BIO"
Biomechanic,
It appears all you know how to do is toss out insults and try to present yourself as an expert yet there is never any (technical) substance in your posts. Are you insecure? Are you incapable of communicating in a technical manner? Can you for once base an argument on science? The Ad Homenim logical fallacy will not work with me. Here's what you do... You state exactly what is wrong then explain exactly why it is wrong. Detail your work then maybe a discussion can take place. You should have learned how to communicate in school. You did attend school did you not? I assume you graduated from high school. Quote:
|
CG or C of Rotation? Not necessarily the same...
Quote:
noodle = brain tangent = thought process After that you lose me. I'm science based. I go by numbers (data). I refer you to figure 7 or linked pdf (above) there is you angular velocity for 4 different golfers. Its increasing (at slightly varying rates) for all golfers. Its not constant and there for the concept of COAM does not apply. Help me try to understand where you're coming from. What is it about rejecting the COAM myth that troubles you? For instance is it because you've come to believe COAM is responsible for the release? Just asking. C |
Quote:
|
no mind
No I dropped out of school and I live on the street.
I think you need to read 2-m-1 and 2-e so you understand conservation of momentum in golf. Wow the paper is only three years old , interesting present me with data using opti sensors and using vicon system for starters. they are only measuring certain segments,they are using a cheap 6 dof system which is limited to data. how about providing data which they are using the full body suit you wear which has opti sensors and every body part and every muscle and both hands as well. If your placing your beliefs on this one paper whom's technology limits them to measuring data don't waste my time. It's funny you a man of science base, interesting I wondering if you can read, I think you need to re read the paper to understand what it is they are studying exactly, I don't believe they are talking about ball compression or how hard they are driving the right arm home to compress the ball, I don't see they are talking about the angles of the right hand at all. hmmm Now I'm starting to question how much you do know about science and what you know about golf, Golf is easy to answer very little. have you ever study T.G.M, indicate you haven't. don't waste my time with data that isn't using the best technology , that data was almost as good as K-vest. clothes move in motion so the sensors would have moved, I bet you haven't seen the research papers they did on this. I love their little quote stating they used snug clothing. Most researchers would have thrown this paper over their shoulder once they read this. good to see you know your a man of science based and not technology based as well. This way we can accept the fact that you based you belief on science and entrusted these guys were using state of the art technology. don't be to upset. I understand your a man of science. And your not up to speed with technology and measuring systems, Our understand the difference between all the 6 dof systems out there. :crybaby: |
Just a thought
One thing I've liked about this forum is that for the most part the posts are cordial and there is an effort to "understand and learn". For that to happen - two people must provide new information and using reason - eventually come to a common understanding. There is always a place for debate or strong disagreement but when you run out of "ammunition" it's probably time to stop and walk away instead heading down the road of name calling or degrading the other persons character in order to "win". In fact if you do that - you probably don't have the information to support your statements- fully i.e. to have someone else understand them.
Since I'm not an owner of this site nor an administrator of this site- you don't need to listen to me - my only credentials are 900+ posts - some good - some bad - but here's just a thought - 1) if you've posted on this thread 2) if you are new to the forum with less than 20 lifetime posts 3) if you've re-read your posts and found that you've more than once personally attacked the character of another forum member (whether provoked or not) 4) Then, consider either changing your approach or leave! I've got a nice neighborhood and nice neighbors - we have certain rules in the Association, certain standards of conduct. You're probably accustomed to living in today's world where anything goes- where there is no black and white - where you feel some fundamental right to act however you want - you know - "free speech"- if that's the case then GET OUT OF MY NEIGHBORHOOD! |
Ya, know what you mean Mike. But I dont want these guys to stop outright.
Bio, NM. Why dont you debate a single aspect of the swing that relates to the topic at hand. Something that we golf practitioners would find of practical interest. I am interested in the hips for instance. My first TGM based instructor (not an AI I should mention) suggested that it isnt how fast you spin your hips but rather how quickly you stop them that adds to the clubhead's speed. Personally I dont subscribe to either extreme. I can spin or spin and brake my hips without my arms even moving an inch if I wish. In regard to maximizing clubhead speed should the hips: -spin hard? -brake hard? -merely smoothly initiate? |
BIO ... just the latest poser and charlatan?
Hey Bio BSer,
I seriously doubt you even know what a degree of freedom is. You're a phoney... a fake... a poser. In fact its obvious you don't know squat about mechanics, bio or otherwise. So you've purchased a license to dispense BS at $50 a pop. BIG DEAL The real problem is you're clueless. Quote:
|
In essence I agree with Mike O (jsut not about COAM),
Forum participation should be a generally pleasant mutually beneficial, mutually edifying experience. The Golden Rule should always apply (and I am not referring to the: He with the gold (forum owner) RULES interpretation of that either). Frankly I'm not interest in "debating" anything with anyone. I have my opinions formed from the basis of my experiences (scholastic and otherwise) and I'm willing to share to those provided they're not answered by insults. Discussion... yes. Pointing out errors in my logic... yes absolutely but ad homenin insults completely devoid of substance NO WAY. I have some thoughts on the matter of a golfers hip action but honestly... I ask you what is the point sharing them? When I find myself dreading the thought of checking responses to a forum post I've made, its probably time to move on. kind regards all... Quote:
|
OK... I'm with you now... I'll attempt an answer before I leave...
Basically I agree with Bio's mentor (Welch), i.e. the brains in that operation. Wether walking or golfing we create "motion" by shifting our CG thereby creating a temporary imbalance. In the golf swing we "fall" (and catch ourselves). Where I differ with Welch's concept its the notion that that its the shear force reaction at the feet that is what's most important. That concerns motion in the horizontal plane but it neglects the larger motion in the vertical (yes I know horz. and vertical are not the "correct" terms here). Bottomline is all golfers are (falling) in some combination of horz AND vert. Just a suggestion... If yYou want to improve your golf swing, take the spikes off your shoes and go practice hitting off loose dirt (using a tee) where your feet will slip if you apply too much shear force. It will teach you to "fall" in the vertical plane. IMOP that's key.. that's where the "power" is at. Take a look at young Mike Austin. http://www.mikeaustingolf.com/video/early_lessons.wmv He's falling around a posted left leg. Centripetal acceleration keeps him rotating about his posted left leg the same way it keeps the moon rotating about earth. He's falling in the vertical (not horizontal) plane. Even still, angular momentum is changing ... its not being conserved. So the normal force distribution/shifting between the two feet is key. Mike called his the compound pivot or weight shifting pivot. http://www.mikeaustingolf.com/video/at_the_top.wmv I leave you with this: COAM and Kinetic Chain Momentum transfer is BS. Hand path and learning to fall correctly are key and always Swing easy hit hard. no_mind Quote:
|
No mind golfer,
depends how you take an insult, in australia we call this Sh''t stirring, stirring your mates up and getting a reaction, it's all fun and games. I never take what you say personally, I laugh at your insults. If you agree with shear forces , then your admitting your agreeing with conservation of monentum, and coam. how you think normal and shear forces work, conservation momentum. |
Quote:
Anyway, my posts to that site haven't been deleted and since the time you were wiped out, I've continued to post there to implore anyone to explain to me in the Queen's English what the hell a "kinetic chain snap" is and how you can use your "pivot" to do it. Well I haven't gotten any good answers except that I am wrong to even cast a doubt in the direction of pivot induced kinetic chain snapping since some PHD clearly posted and explained a diagram of 16 or 8 piece linked chains to show that kinetic chain snapping is not only possible but likely necessary to generate the adequate or "missing?" horsepower that Cochran and Stobbs struggled to substantiate in order for good golfers to hit balls as far as they do.. I have been studying biomechanical research concerning the golfswing for many years and I've yet to uncover solid evidence to support the idea that power in good golf swings is generated by rotational movements of the pelvis and spine. Of course these rotations are necessary to create good backswings, good transitions, and good downswing posturings to strike the ball well, but I've never heard of these rotations (especially hip/pelvic rotations) as being able to generate or store significant power for golf. In fact I'm struggling to find any credible biomechanical literature wherein twisting, or coiling, or winding up, or pivoting of the pelvis and torso are used to describe dominant power generation in any powerful forms of human locomotion. The credible research that I have studied strongly suggests that the difficult to describe lateral slide and resultant weight pressure shift and slight pivot of the hip girdle toward the target and onto the left leg is responsible for generating the real power for good golf swings. The research always describes this lateral pelvic shift/slight rotation as occurring BEFORE the completion of the backswing, and the research generally claims that this movement serves two critical functions in good golf swings: First, it is opposed by the grounded left foot and this opposition promotes subsequent rotation of the pelvis to the left about and above the left femoral head, which allows the pelvic girdle to rotate and face the target by the end of the swing. Second, it serves to pre-stretch principle upper extremity adductors (primarily pectoralis major and latissimus dorsi) before golfers initiate the downswing by contracting those muscles. More recent research shows that this PRE-DOWNSWING lateral weight pressure shift and slight leftward rotation of the pelvic girdle likely pre-stretches the right external oblique muscle as well, which will subsequently contract and initiate torso rotation to the left side on the downswing. It is the stretching and subsequent contraction of these muscles that enhance or harness the power created by the initial PRE-DOWNSWING lateral shift and slight rotation of the pelvis. I'd like to throw in that I hope most golfers have effectively hinged their right forearm about its elbow and both hands about their wrists, thus pre-stretching the right triceps and both sets of appropriate forearm muscles to contract on the downswing to further and dramatically enhance or harness the power generated by the initial PRE-DOWNSWING lateral shift and slight rotation of the pelvis. I interpret from your posts that you basically espouse the validity of the research that I have studied. None of this research describes COAM or pivot induced kinetic chain snapping as enhancing, harnessing or "overpowering?" power generation. Golfswings are kinetic chains but "kinetic chains" are merely descriptions of types of movement and/or sequencing of movements within a given activity. I don't think "kinetic chains" describe power generation or power enhancement. I think a lot of good people have been convinced that the lateral pelvic shift/rotation thing STARTS the downswing instead of PRECEDES it. If measurements are taken of a PRECEDING THE DOWNSWING MOTION as being a START OF THE DOWNSWING motion, then those measurements will likely be compared to a backswing that hasn't ended yet - and huge brain snaps will occur in the wrong direction as a result. By the way, Tiger is the best at slowing and stopping his pivot and arms after he starts the downswing, especially when he hears a camera click, but alas, the club never hits the ball because it stopped too! NM, thanks for sticking to your guns. I don't want to write any more posts for a long time. If anyone can be right concerning this subject, I firmly believe that it is you. Don't let it go to your head though! |
Quote:
|
Bucket is alive! I was afraid the poultry police took him....
|
Cluck me!
Naw, Tyson Chicken has got him in a "think tank" somewhere! The are paying in extra fried nuggets!
I am pretty sure if Mike O is a member of any type of homeowners association that neighbors go missing from time to time! |
Quote:
What the hell just happened there? :confused1 BamBam please check where you left a window open- the Bucket has escaped the mental ward and is now back!!! Run!! P.S. And I sense that Okie's doubting that I would qualify for a home owner's assocation?!&D: |
Coophitter -- Always a Great Read
Quote:
:salut: |
From a little something I wrote based on an article my chiropractor gave me a about spinal injury due to rotation.
"The Golfing Machine by Homer Kelley teaches that there are four sources of power in the golf swing, known as Power Accumulators- or Power Sources- none of which are based on torso rotation. The turning of the body, "pivot", should be a reaction to where the hands need to go. This is referred to as a "hand controlled pivot" in The Golfing Machine. Many teachers believe that the rotation of the body controls the hands. This is fine if you want to hit less than your maximum distance potential and create room for injury. The geometry and physics of the golf swing, studied by all Authorized Instructors of The Golfing Machine, dictates that the hands always have a destination. Give your hands an assignment, where to go and what to do, then have them complete that assignment. The body should play a supporting role, and not vice-versa." |
To research does this have foundation
Quote:
I'm T.G.M all they way I love homers work, the day I was introduced to golf I was taught educated hands, but my weakness was human body motion. My body didn't fire in the right sequence in order for the mechanics to be executed correctly, I can shot par on my ear. what let me down is not being able to 4 rounds of 68 on my ear. This was due to incorrect human body motion. We need the world of mechanics and I'm so happy we have yoda , mike and have homer who gives us understanding of mechanics. This is the world of mechanics and there is another world human body motion, how can mechanics be executed correctly when human body motion isn't performing they way it should in order for mechanics work. Homer states 6-M-1 that is the downswing sequence. you can have the best educated hands on the planet but with out the human body motion , moving in the correct sequence educated hands will never happen. In every all bat and ball sports, throwing a ball is the same sequence in kinetic linking. This isn't from he said , she said, a form of opinions, this is developed from measured science. Bear in mind you talking about mechanics a different world to human body motion. My question is I don't question homers work he's on the money. But I question how people deliver what he's says and if they truly understand his work. They may understand the mechanics but how well do they understand the human body motion in order to work. Why hasn't there been a world number 1 golfer who's T.G.M student, why isn't T.G.M students dominating golf on tour ? I believe it's the communication of homers work. And lack of knowledge how human body motion functions. Video can't measure human body motion, nor can ball flight. I think we all need to get realistic, We need homer, we also need human body motion. |
B,
I am going to comment/ask to try to understand you better. Quote:
|
Amen Golfer
Don't get me wrong as far as mechanics goes, Homers a legend in my eyes and measuring up with biomechanics, he's got the goods as well. Homer actually blows my mind, to have spent 27 years and to create this book is amazing achievement and how he figured 6-M-1 blows me out of the water, amazing.
I teach use to teach T.G.M myself, but my experience I have had students on video look flawless on video but can't break 80, but after screening them, it had nothing to do with mechanics it was their body motion, incorrect pivot speeds, had no muscular loading, incorrect kinetic sequence which video couldn't pick up. Once I fixed their human motion they can break 80 week in week out. I now stepped out of the world of coaching and into human motion you can't combine both, this leads confusion to everyone. So I've gone down a new road of human body motion and trained in this field. But here is a little story in O.Z i was crowned to be the next Greg Norman, I could play in my day, two weeks before I was to fly out and play European tour I was crushed between to front enloaders, I spent four years learning to walk again.Doing Hydro therapy,pyhsio therapy in and out of hospitals. Last march I pick up my sticks in birth of a come back, I shot 108 first round back and 7 months later shot par, I could shot under par but not consistently enough, I had a block right we couldn't answer, this damaged my score every time, And was only maybe once or twice a round. Most times I threw in compensations to combat it. I went to G.S.E.D they had no answers , wasn't until I was screened till I found out what caused my problem wasn't mechanics.It was my start down sequence and ever so slight ,video could pick it up and also muscular loading, my hips weren't moving properly either which caused the block. I fixed my body motion and now I can go out and shot under par on my ear. With out homer of human body motion this would not have been achievable. I'm a Sport clinician(biomechanist) I measure all sports, no wires or sensors and use equal to the top of the range 6 dof vicon system. we measure ,running,any throwing sport, any kicking a ball sport, tennis,baseball,softball,volleyball,soccer,golf,cy cling,polo,track and field. We can measure any sport even polo. The amazing thing is in most sports even golf the kinetic linking is the same sequence, on video this may not appear to present what happens but this is what occurs when measuring human body motion I worked with T.P.I for a while to discover they are stepping into the mechanically work which isn't what biomechanics is about, it's about human motion. And this is giving every one the wrong perception of biomechanics, who do they think they are walking into a world of mechanics, I know from inside knowledge they are way off the eight ball especially with mechanics, there data is way off the eight ball, I have hitters and according to their data this was wrong, why ?all they can measure is swinging, but this data is way off too. And this is why they aren't getting results and I left incorrect data and hitters were getting destroyed cause they were trying to change them to swinging and to make things worse incorrect data . not good. The company I'm with is all for Hitting and swinging, We love homers work, he's the man. If I have a student who has a mechanical issue I would send them to yoda or you or dart in oz. this is their department. Not mine I'm human body motion not mechanics. For example if your hip pivot isn't accelerating of declerating correctly I teach students how to do this. Stuff that isn't measurable by mechanics. Lets be honest here, have you ever had a player who looks great on video but can't hit or you can't work out why? The answer is there are no faults their mechanics are perfect, it's human body motion which is the problem. I think this is the missing link to homers work and unfortunately homer wasn't around long enough but I'm sure he would have teamed up with our world. Homer is 100% pure with mechanics and I admire the man and love his work. His work helped me understand the world I'm in, when a coaches comes to me I can speak homers lingo to help them combine mechanics with human body motion, it awesome, god bless homer |
B,
Thanks for your post. AC |
[quote=biomechanic;57317]What measured data does the chiropractor have to support his beliefs.
QUOTE] Seaman Dr. Back pain in golfers: etiology and prevention. Journal of Sports Chiropractic & Rehabilitation, June 1998; 12(2), pp45-54. |
[quote=Augusta Golf;57327]
Quote:
|
The relevance is that a well known chiropractor did his research on spinal injury due to excessive rotation. If you want to look up his credentials and research methods that's up to you.
|
Augusta Golfer
When you see Dr Seaman next ask him who helped with his research on his book on Backswing Dynamics:) and biomechanics:)
Where did he get his research from and who did this for him:) . The boys I work with helped him with potential injury they did his research he got all this information from our biomedical engineer. Now I have an understanding, I never said you need a huge shoulders turn and huge hip rotations, I'm well aware of potential injury we measure potential injury and I agree with you. I know huge shoulders rotation and huge hip turns caused huge injuries, but educated hands won't prevent this. Learning muscular loading and the right body motion for each body segment does. People who have these problems is caused by poor body motion and haven't been taught how to acceleration and deceleration each body segment right. Nor how to load their muscles correctly. Most people have this problem from the perception of zone 1 and the perception the hips clears left, they don't clear left as much as we think. they don't turn as much as we believe. Plus this is a lack of understands the purpose of the hips in the golfswing and upper body This is my point here, why does homer speak About 6-m-1, what is the purpose of this ? Zone 1 how much should the shoulders and hips turn, on the back swing and downswings ? it's doesn't need to be measured either. My point body motion is a different world, Zone 1 is an area where the mechanical world lack education but then this is a different field and for this field, should be passed on to people who are expert in this field. I will be honest here it's a lack of golf coaches understanding of the human body motion which is causing potential injury. But this isn't their field of expertise either so that's ok. It's no fault of theirs. They are mechanics. Not body motion. there lack of understanding of 6-m-1 and zone 1 is the problem. educated hands are only as useful as well trained pivot train |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:30 AM. |