Birdie, in the real world, machines take many different forms. The word machine was defined long before dirt bikes were around. In my world we define a rope as a machine.
Ok man sure. Big deal.
It doesn't change anything tho cause Homer's machine doesn't resemble a human being. It swings a golf club yes. But it does not work the same way as a human. (I think that was the original point)
Quote:
No, I agree with you here and I took some liberty with my interpretation. I was trying to cite Homer's preference for a head centred pivot.
This is the spine - you know, that thing that runs up the middle of the back.... not some mystical line that runs through the 'look of the back' from a front on view....
From some of the information given by Mr. Skywalker... it has been shown that in order to KEEP a steady HEAD in a golf stroke, the SPINE DOES INDEED MOVE IN WAYS THAT MAY BE DIFFICULT TO DETECT. Some of the difficulty here could be in the Straight Rod Spine CONCEPT, Neutral Spine, or other ideas that are out there.
The TORSO, and HEAD stays fairly steady, but the SPINE underneath that TORSO is doing various things under there in order for this STEADINESS to occur. If fact, if one attempts to keep the SPINE STRAIGHT LIKE A ROD, the HEAD will then most likely be forced to MOVE, probably both LATERALLY and DOWN at certain points during the STROKE.
And all that I wanted was "how you would interpret the additional text"!
Define interpret,,, just kiddin. It turned into quite a thread eh?
Quote:
Can we all agree on that by having a stationary head, it is easier to return the clubhead to the ball more accurately than without a stationary head?
Crux of the matter. Taken to the extreme, it would be nearly impossible to return the club to the ball accurately with head movement of lets say 6" and certainly easier with a stationary head. But most players exhibit some movement. So where can we draw the line?
IMO, staionary is the promised land and with incremental degrees of movement, consistent clubhead to ball delivery gets tougher (not impossible, just tougher).
IMO, staionary is the promised land and with incremental degrees of movement, consistent clubhead to ball delivery gets tougher (not impossible, just tougher).
Disagree.
I'm done tho. (at least for now...could change tomorrow who knows)
This is the spine - you know, that thing that runs up the middle of the back.... not some mystical line that runs through the 'look of the back' from a front on view....
Despair at me eh.
Yes I know what a spine is man.
I think a lower intelligence monkey could prolly tell that the pink line is not Sam Snead's spine....
....and a higher intelligence monkey could prolly tell that the blue line is not Sam Snead's spine.
I guess it could be called a "look of lean"...? (yes I know this is not a Golfing Machine term)
I dunno who would ever try to pass those lines off as the spine (has anyone?) but I wouldn't.
I don't think the green line is right either tho.
(any spine experts out there??)
...
Anyway...
Regardless of all this spine anatomy stuff....(which is interesting in itself)...
Those pictures are both 2 examples of pretty nice pivots- IMO. Jack and Sam. (although I'm not overly big on Jack's right knee)
They worked very well for these players....are pretty orthodox (i.e. "classic") pivots IMO.....
just kiddin. It turned into quite a thread eh?
Hybrid Mode
