Cameras are getting better all the time.
They have their application for golf coaches.
They irrelevant to my field they can't measure body segment speeds and accel and decel etc or muscle groups
Bioengine,
In my lessons, I often use video. Most people learn well visually, especially when the subject is themselves!
As you have implied, video is a limited presentation of (1) alignments (geometry); (2) stroke component variations, action and sequencing (physics); and (3) any recommended improvement (objective and subjective analysis).
I am intrigued by your work, and without bias or an attitude of confrontation, ask the following questions:
1. At what point -- 100-shooter, 80-shooter, 70-shooter or TOUR pro -- do your quantitative 'physical' measurements (segment speeds, acceleration/deceleration, muscle groups and their 'firing', etc.) add value to the more limited video procedure?
2. Assuming the data indicate inefficiencies and the potential for improvement, how do the procedures you recommend differ from that of more conventional instruction?
3. Finally, how do you help your student translate that quantified data/information into its athletic equivalent, i.e., a more efficient golf stroke?
Threaded Mode
