Tour Tempo theory mistake!!!

135

Comments

  • gators78gators78 ClubWRX Posts: 3,907 ClubWRX
    edited Oct 11, 2012 #62
    crapula wrote:

    gators78 wrote:

    Golfzalo wrote:


    But it is not 3 times longer!!!!! It is only 2 times!!!




    Wow I'm a total idiot, all this time I thought 1 second is 3 times longer than a 1/3 a second.................



    image/russian_roulette.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':russian_roulette:' />




    If you looked at my visual aid I created you will see that the audio clips tour tempo uses DOES NOT have the transition to impact starting at one second. It starts early.




    Right, I said I used that as an exaggeration for a round number. Ernie Els in the Golf Magazine article is .8 seconds and .26.
    G400 Max
    M2 3W, Hybrid
    i210s
    SM7s
    Sigma 2, Tyne 4
  • crapulacrapula Golf! Members Posts: 1,778 ✭✭
    edited Oct 11, 2012 #63
    gators78 wrote:

    crapula wrote:

    gators78 wrote:

    Golfzalo wrote:


    But it is not 3 times longer!!!!! It is only 2 times!!!




    Wow I'm a total idiot, all this time I thought 1 second is 3 times longer than a 1/3 a second.................



    image/russian_roulette.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':russian_roulette:' />




    If you looked at my visual aid I created you will see that the audio clips tour tempo uses DOES NOT have the transition to impact starting at one second. It starts early.




    Right, I said I used that as an exaggeration for a round number. Ernie Els in the Golf Magazine article is .8 seconds and .26.




    Ok, that's a bad example because that is a 3.25:1 ratio. No wonder Ernie struggles. I'm only joking, I know that it is not an exact 3:1, but the closer the better. Using the audio they provide you will swing in a 2:1 ratio if you time it exactly to the music.



    Are you not looking at the ticks? Clearly there are 10 at the end and 20 at the beginning. Which is .83333333 seconds (beginning) and .4166666666 seconds (end).
    Srixon Z 785 9.5 Project X HC HZRDUS Yellow 6.0
    Srixon Z F85 13.5 Project X HC HZRDUS Yellow 6.0
    Srixon Z H85 16 Project X HZRDUS Black 6.0
    Srixon Z 785 3-PW KBS Tour 120 S
    Cleveland RTX-3 52, 58 KBS Tour 120 S
    Odyssey Toulon Memphis Stroke Lab
    Srixon Yellow ZStar XV
  • gators78gators78 ClubWRX Posts: 3,907 ClubWRX
    edited Oct 11, 2012 #64
    crapula wrote:

    gators78 wrote:

    crapula wrote:

    gators78 wrote:

    Golfzalo wrote:


    But it is not 3 times longer!!!!! It is only 2 times!!!




    Wow I'm a total idiot, all this time I thought 1 second is 3 times longer than a 1/3 a second.................



    image/russian_roulette.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':russian_roulette:' />




    If you looked at my visual aid I created you will see that the audio clips tour tempo uses DOES NOT have the transition to impact starting at one second. It starts early.




    Right, I said I used that as an exaggeration for a round number. Ernie Els in the Golf Magazine article is .8 seconds and .26.




    Ok, that's a bad example because that is a 3.25:1 ratio. No wonder Ernie struggles. I'm only joking, I know that it is not an exact 3:1, but the closer the better. Using the audio they provide you will swing in a 2:1 ratio if you time it exactly to the music.



    Are you not looking at the ticks? Clearly there are 10 at the end and 20 at the beginning. Which is .83333333 seconds and .4166666666 seconds.




    I mean just keep in mind John wrote this book in 2004, it was one of the highest selling instructional books of all time, then he re-evaluated his study and got an independent study from Yale University to verify his original findings, all the while being published in various publications, oh and that 2 to 1 ratio for is now suggested for shortgame shots, so maybe that's what you're listening to I have no idea. But when you're hawking tones from his site and ignoring the Yale study and the Golf Magazine article (not to mention the fact you didn't even buy this stuff) I'm not sure what to tell you.
    G400 Max
    M2 3W, Hybrid
    i210s
    SM7s
    Sigma 2, Tyne 4
  • crapulacrapula Golf! Members Posts: 1,778 ✭✭
    edited Oct 11, 2012 #65
    gators78 wrote:


    I mean just keep in mind John wrote this book in 2004, it was one of the highest selling instructional books of all time, then he re-evaluated his study and got an independent study from Yale University to verify his original findings, all the while being published in various publications, oh and that 2 to 1 ratio for is now suggested for shortgame shots, so maybe that's what you're listening to I have no idea. But when you're hawking tones from his site and ignoring the Yale study and the Golf Magazine article (not to mention the fact you didn't even buy this stuff) I'm not sure what to tell you.




    The file I "hawked" was a 24-8 file.



    Why would I buy any of the stuff when the audio files are wrong?



    The study is correct, the audio files are incorrect.
    Srixon Z 785 9.5 Project X HC HZRDUS Yellow 6.0
    Srixon Z F85 13.5 Project X HC HZRDUS Yellow 6.0
    Srixon Z H85 16 Project X HZRDUS Black 6.0
    Srixon Z 785 3-PW KBS Tour 120 S
    Cleveland RTX-3 52, 58 KBS Tour 120 S
    Odyssey Toulon Memphis Stroke Lab
    Srixon Yellow ZStar XV
  • gspotmcgeegspotmcgee Members Posts: 15
    Each beat has an up and a down. I think he is just starting his count with a down beat instead of an up





    (one and two and three) ( and four and ) is clearly not 3:1. But if you start with a down beat you get:



    (and one and two and three) (and four), which is 3:1



    It makes sense if you start with the down beat. After all, it'd be hard to hear if you were trying to listen for the "ands" that would be in between tones.



    Anyway, just my thoughts
  • drewspindrewspin Charter Members Posts: 2,996
    Thank you OP and Crapula.



    Seems very clear that the tones in the tested file are in fact 2:1 ratio.



    Hopefully they get it corrected.



    Big oops.
  • drewspindrewspin Charter Members Posts: 2,996
    gators78 wrote:


    I'm not sure what to tell you.




    How about "You're right, good catch."
  • drewspindrewspin Charter Members Posts: 2,996
    BTW - it's not a theory mistake, its a tone files mistake.
  • Will I have to know all of this to swing a club?
  • gators78gators78 ClubWRX Posts: 3,907 ClubWRX
    drewspin wrote:

    gators78 wrote:


    I'm not sure what to tell you.




    How about "You're right, good catch."




    Ha, I'll do that once the OP revises the name of this thread.
    G400 Max
    M2 3W, Hybrid
    i210s
    SM7s
    Sigma 2, Tyne 4
  • Body_VisionsBody_Visions Members Posts: 2,450 ✭✭
    crapula wrote:

    nova6868 wrote:


    Like others have said, the beats may not be precisely 3:1.



    They account for reaction time. Mostly, the reaction time needed to transition from backswing to downswing.




    So, the idea is that everyone will be late and never notice that they are late, therefore using it correctly?




    I think he is right here. I believe the book tells you not to anticipate the beats, react to them. I am no musician, but I believe this is correct.
  • GolfzaloGolfzalo Members Posts: 37
    drewspin wrote:


    Thank you OP and Crapula.



    Seems very clear that the tones in the tested file are in fact 2:1 ratio.



    Hopefully they get it corrected.



    Big oops.




    You are welcome!
  • crapulacrapula Golf! Members Posts: 1,778 ✭✭
    gators78 wrote:

    drewspin wrote:

    gators78 wrote:


    I'm not sure what to tell you.




    How about "You're right, good catch."




    Ha, I'll do that once the OP revises the name of this thread.




    WHAT??? You have been arguing this whole time and you know that the audio files are 2:1?



    Read his original post, the only thing he questioned was the audio files actually teaching a 2:1 ratio, which you have been arguing that they are 3:1.



    So what if the post should have read, "Tour Tempo audio files are teaching a 2:1 ratio!!!!!!!!"
    Srixon Z 785 9.5 Project X HC HZRDUS Yellow 6.0
    Srixon Z F85 13.5 Project X HC HZRDUS Yellow 6.0
    Srixon Z H85 16 Project X HZRDUS Black 6.0
    Srixon Z 785 3-PW KBS Tour 120 S
    Cleveland RTX-3 52, 58 KBS Tour 120 S
    Odyssey Toulon Memphis Stroke Lab
    Srixon Yellow ZStar XV
  • Also a musician and noticed this same problem with the tracks when the book came out (yes, I bought it and listened to the tracks on the CD back then, but could not use them). I liked the video frame analysis explanation, and applaud the author for his research. But the tempo tracks WERE different from the video ratios.



    If we're talking TEMPO, we're talking about a critical element of music. Musicians count silently in their heads or otherwise keep time in some other way, and the "downbeat" is on "1" so everyone starts at the same time in their counting. You could count from 0 to 3 if you wanted, but it's not done that way in music notation. The absence of a beep does not stop the counting.



    If there are breaks in the beeps on the tracks, then have to be mentally subdivided and the "rests" (non-beeps) incorporated into the tempo. You can't stuff 3 counts into a blank space that would otherwise only fit 2 beeps based on the intervals between the 3rd and 4th beep. It does not work that way. Those are two different tempos, then. It does not matter if you "react" or "anticipate", the space between the 3rd and 4th beep defines the single count. And in the case of the tracks, the ratio works out to 2:1.



    Maybe a better way of looking at the 3:1 for the purpose of swing analysis is to pay attention to Sam Snead who said waltz time was the secret to his swing. Watch videos of Sam and count from the start of the swing to the top, then impact, in a regular time/tempo. Notice it can be done with 2, 3, 4, 5 or ANY number you want at impact, depending on the SPEED AT WHICH YOU COUNT and the intervals between each number. Try it. You can see Sam swinging in 3/4, 6/8, or 4/4 time very easily depending on how you count.



    The bottom line is that the tones with the book do not match the ratio used in the book if you are trying to count out tempo evenly. BUT, the takeaway from the book remains the same: different players have different speeds at which they swing, but the overall rhythm from start to finish is similar from player to player.
  • GolfzaloGolfzalo Members Posts: 37
    gators78 wrote:

    drewspin wrote:

    gators78 wrote:


    I'm not sure what to tell you.




    How about "You're right, good catch."




    Ha, I'll do that once the OP revises the name of this thread.




    I would change the name, no problem about that!!! How can I do it?



    BTW I never said the pros don't swing in 3:1, I'm just saying the 1, 2 , 3 and 4 counts and sound files are wrong. The discrepancy in what Novosel is teaching through his CD. That means that every single golfer that has follow the tracks in all these years has been swinging the club in a 2:1 ratio, sorry.



    G
  • crapulacrapula Golf! Members Posts: 1,778 ✭✭

    crapula wrote:

    nova6868 wrote:


    Like others have said, the beats may not be precisely 3:1.



    They account for reaction time. Mostly, the reaction time needed to transition from backswing to downswing.




    So, the idea is that everyone will be late and never notice that they are late, therefore using it correctly?




    I think he is right here. I believe the book tells you not to anticipate the beats, react to them. I am no musician, but I believe this is correct.




    This would make even less sense assuming that everyone takes 1/3 of a second to react to the first tone and still makes contact on the fourth beat. 1/3 second 8 frames. So 12 frames to transition and 10 frames to impact, a 1.2:1 ratio.



    Think about it, even if you react to each beat, the tempo would still be the same. The only way to obtain a 3:1 ratio using the audio files they provide is to start the swing on the 4 and make contact on the four. But if you do that, your back swing will be 1.25 seconds long!



    4 1 2 3 4

    start transition to impact
    Srixon Z 785 9.5 Project X HC HZRDUS Yellow 6.0
    Srixon Z F85 13.5 Project X HC HZRDUS Yellow 6.0
    Srixon Z H85 16 Project X HZRDUS Black 6.0
    Srixon Z 785 3-PW KBS Tour 120 S
    Cleveland RTX-3 52, 58 KBS Tour 120 S
    Odyssey Toulon Memphis Stroke Lab
    Srixon Yellow ZStar XV
  • gators78gators78 ClubWRX Posts: 3,907 ClubWRX
    crapula wrote:

    gators78 wrote:

    drewspin wrote:

    gators78 wrote:


    I'm not sure what to tell you.




    How about "You're right, good catch."




    Ha, I'll do that once the OP revises the name of this thread.




    WHAT??? You have been arguing this whole time and you know that the audio files are 2:1?



    Read his original post, the only thing he questioned was the audio files actually teaching a 2:1 ratio, which you have been arguing that they are 3:1.



    So what if the post should have read, "Tour Tempo audio files are teaching a 2:1 ratio!!!!!!!!"




    The OP said the theory was wrong based on "listening to the tracks on youtube or elsewhere." Not until the 20th post did the link come. I have both books and there is a noticeable difference between 3:1 full swing tones and the 2:1 short game tones, and I stayed away from the song-style beats because there's too much background noise. John is a member here so I'm sure he'll chime in shortly on the accuracy of the files in the link provided.
    G400 Max
    M2 3W, Hybrid
    i210s
    SM7s
    Sigma 2, Tyne 4
  • hoganfan924hoganfan924 Members Posts: 5,185
    crapula wrote:

    gators78 wrote:


    The problem is a musician heard the beeps and assumed they were on a 3:1 ratio, which is incorrect. The PURPOSE of the beeps is simply to have a time segment that is 3X longer than the next segment.



    To exaggerate the timing should be BEEP (One second) BEEP (1/3 a second) BEEP. I have no idea what beats those are supposed to be on, but that's how the timing works.



    http://www.tourtempo.com/yale.pdf




    I recorded the first track and brought it into Premiere, created a 24fps project and counted the frames from beat 1 to beat 3 (20 frames), then counted the frames from 3 to 4 (10 frames).



    wunsl.jpg



    As you can see, the three is not at one second (if the 3 was at the 3rd four I typed in, then the 3 would be at one second). And this is a 2:1 ratio.


    This should work out exactly as Novosol intended, since your react to the 1st and 2nd tone and the 3rd tone is actual impact. So the actual time between 3 and 4 above - transition to impact (if you use the tones correctly and don't try to anticipate them), will be shortened by your reaction time, since your actual transition won't start until after you hear the 2nd tone (as others have pointed out). So in looking at the above graph, you'd have to phase shift 1, 2 and 3 to the right by the typical human reaction time.



    My guess is that Novosol knew that there would be some degree of "anticipation" in reacting to the 2nd tone though and probably adjusted for this a bit in developing the exact spacing of the tones, then tested it on golfers and filmed them to confirm that his spacing would work.
  • GolfzaloGolfzalo Members Posts: 37
    gators78 wrote:

    crapula wrote:

    gators78 wrote:

    drewspin wrote:

    gators78 wrote:


    I'm not sure what to tell you.




    How about "You're right, good catch."




    Ha, I'll do that once the OP revises the name of this thread.




    WHAT??? You have been arguing this whole time and you know that the audio files are 2:1?



    Read his original post, the only thing he questioned was the audio files actually teaching a 2:1 ratio, which you have been arguing that they are 3:1.



    So what if the post should have read, "Tour Tempo audio files are teaching a 2:1 ratio!!!!!!!!"




    The OP said the theory was wrong based on "listening to the tracks on youtube or elsewhere." Not until the 20th post did the link come. I have both books and there is a noticeable difference between 3:1 full swing tones and the 2:1 short game tones, and I stayed away from the song-style beats because there's too much background noise. John is a member here so I'm sure he'll chime in shortly on the accuracy of the files in the link provided.




    I can't believe that's your best argument! You just can't agree and accept that my point is correct and I just mislead the title. Anyway, I'm sure I have my point as I and Crapula showed. It's up to you what you think.



    Cheers.



    G
  • GolfzaloGolfzalo Members Posts: 37
    crapula wrote:

    gators78 wrote:

    drewspin wrote:

    gators78 wrote:


    I'm not sure what to tell you.




    How about "You're right, good catch."




    Ha, I'll do that once the OP revises the name of this thread.




    WHAT??? You have been arguing this whole time and you know that the audio files are 2:1?



    Read his original post, the only thing he questioned was the audio files actually teaching a 2:1 ratio, which you have been arguing that they are 3:1.



    So what if the post should have read, "Tour Tempo audio files are teaching a 2:1 ratio!!!!!!!!"




    Thanks for understanding and agreeing with my point and helping other to do so!!!



    I've said enough...



    G
  • tmfool tmfool Members Posts: 1,828 ✭✭
    forget about the music...it is irrelevant to the original explaination



    high-speed camera analyzed frames to the top of backswing -- to impact 3:1



    snead was 32:11; els 24:8, tiger 18:6 etc.



    noteworthy that when tiger gets out of sync he is closer to 18:9



    my internal metronome is 1,2,3 (top of b) ROCKY! @ IMPACT (in honor of the person that gave me the tip)



    the website or the beats might be wrong --



    but dont cloud the salient point = 3:1 ratio top:bottom
    TP MC 6-PW Steelfiber i95
    UDI 3-4-5 steelfiber i95
    Puglielli Black 52&56 s/fiber i125
    Adams XTD Superhybrid 17* s/fiber i110
    Superfast TP 13* Matrix HD7
    M2 9.5 (upright) Matrix 7M3
    SC Studio Select custom
    Snell MTB

  • crapula wrote:

    gators78 wrote:


    The problem is a musician heard the beeps and assumed they were on a 3:1 ratio, which is incorrect. The PURPOSE of the beeps is simply to have a time segment that is 3X longer than the next segment.



    To exaggerate the timing should be BEEP (One second) BEEP (1/3 a second) BEEP. I have no idea what beats those are supposed to be on, but that's how the timing works.



    http://www.tourtempo.com/yale.pdf




    I recorded the first track and brought it into Premiere, created a 24fps project and counted the frames from beat 1 to beat 3 (20 frames), then counted the frames from 3 to 4 (10 frames).



    wunsl.jpg



    As you can see, the three is not at one second (if the 3 was at the 3rd four I typed in, then the 3 would be at one second). And this is a 2:1 ratio.


    This should work out exactly as Novosol intended, since your react to the 1st and 2nd tone and the 3rd tone is actual impact. So the actual time between 3 and 4 above - transition to impact (if you use the tones correctly and don't try to anticipate them), will be shortened by your reaction time, since your actual transition won't start until after you hear the 2nd tone (as others have pointed out). So in looking at the above graph, you'd have to phase shift 1, 2 and 3 to the right by the typical human reaction time.



    My guess is that Novosol knew that there would be some degree of "anticipation" in reacting to the 2nd tone though and probably adjusted for this a bit in developing the exact spacing of the tones, then tested it on golfers and filmed them to confirm that his spacing would work.




    If we're talking about miliseconds and tempo that's too imprecise. Plus, part of the theory is the space between the 3rd and 4th beat represents 1 unit, and the rest of the swing is 3. There is not room for 3 of those beats from the 1 to the 3, even if you just "react" and "don't anticipate".



    This seems like a strange way to train tempo/rhythm/timing. In music and dance, there are "count off" beats that lead you into the actual bit. It would make much more sense to have the actual 3:1 exact ratio in beeps, with a count off of the same thing to prepare you for them. Then you don't have to guess about "anticipation", because you're already counting.
  • aimleftaimleft Posts: 205
    When I hear the tour temp I hear a triplet: Based on the definition the OP is sort of right. If you think about the tour tempo as "notes" it would be a 3:1 where the swing is 2 notes and set and through are each one note. If you use are counting intervals it is only 3 intervals. The average Joe fill the rhythym of the notes rather than the interval.
  • crapulacrapula Golf! Members Posts: 1,778 ✭✭

    crapula wrote:

    gators78 wrote:


    The problem is a musician heard the beeps and assumed they were on a 3:1 ratio, which is incorrect. The PURPOSE of the beeps is simply to have a time segment that is 3X longer than the next segment.



    To exaggerate the timing should be BEEP (One second) BEEP (1/3 a second) BEEP. I have no idea what beats those are supposed to be on, but that's how the timing works.



    http://www.tourtempo.com/yale.pdf




    I recorded the first track and brought it into Premiere, created a 24fps project and counted the frames from beat 1 to beat 3 (20 frames), then counted the frames from 3 to 4 (10 frames).



    wunsl.jpg



    As you can see, the three is not at one second (if the 3 was at the 3rd four I typed in, then the 3 would be at one second). And this is a 2:1 ratio.


    This should work out exactly as Novosol intended, since your react to the 1st and 2nd tone and the 3rd tone is actual impact. So the actual time between 3 and 4 above - transition to impact (if you use the tones correctly and don't try to anticipate them), will be shortened by your reaction time, since your actual transition won't start until after you hear the 2nd tone (as others have pointed out). So in looking at the above graph, you'd have to phase shift 1, 2 and 3 to the right by the typical human reaction time.



    My guess is that Novosol knew that there would be some degree of "anticipation" in reacting to the 2nd tone though and probably adjusted for this a bit in developing the exact spacing of the tones, then tested it on golfers and filmed them to confirm that his spacing would work.




    If you are only supposed to react to the first and second tone and make contact on the 3rd, this makes sense, assuming you react on time to the first beat, are 4 frames late on the 3rd beat and 2 frames late to impact.
    Srixon Z 785 9.5 Project X HC HZRDUS Yellow 6.0
    Srixon Z F85 13.5 Project X HC HZRDUS Yellow 6.0
    Srixon Z H85 16 Project X HZRDUS Black 6.0
    Srixon Z 785 3-PW KBS Tour 120 S
    Cleveland RTX-3 52, 58 KBS Tour 120 S
    Odyssey Toulon Memphis Stroke Lab
    Srixon Yellow ZStar XV
  • hoganfan924hoganfan924 Members Posts: 5,185
    Dire Wolf wrote:


    crapula wrote:

    gators78 wrote:


    The problem is a musician heard the beeps and assumed they were on a 3:1 ratio, which is incorrect. The PURPOSE of the beeps is simply to have a time segment that is 3X longer than the next segment.



    To exaggerate the timing should be BEEP (One second) BEEP (1/3 a second) BEEP. I have no idea what beats those are supposed to be on, but that's how the timing works.



    http://www.tourtempo.com/yale.pdf




    I recorded the first track and brought it into Premiere, created a 24fps project and counted the frames from beat 1 to beat 3 (20 frames), then counted the frames from 3 to 4 (10 frames).



    wunsl.jpg



    As you can see, the three is not at one second (if the 3 was at the 3rd four I typed in, then the 3 would be at one second). And this is a 2:1 ratio.


    This should work out exactly as Novosol intended, since your react to the 1st and 2nd tone and the 3rd tone is actual impact. So the actual time between 3 and 4 above - transition to impact (if you use the tones correctly and don't try to anticipate them), will be shortened by your reaction time, since your actual transition won't start until after you hear the 2nd tone (as others have pointed out). So in looking at the above graph, you'd have to phase shift 1, 2 and 3 to the right by the typical human reaction time.



    My guess is that Novosol knew that there would be some degree of "anticipation" in reacting to the 2nd tone though and probably adjusted for this a bit in developing the exact spacing of the tones, then tested it on golfers and filmed them to confirm that his spacing would work.




    If we're talking about miliseconds and tempo that's too imprecise. Plus, part of the theory is the space between the 3rd and 4th beat represents 1 unit, and the rest of the swing is 3. There is not room for 3 of those beats from the 1 to the 3, even if you just "react" and "don't anticipate".



    This seems like a strange way to train tempo/rhythm/timing. In music and dance, there are "count off" beats that lead you into the actual bit. It would make much more sense to have the actual 3:1 exact ratio in beeps, with a count off of the same thing to prepare you for them. Then you don't have to guess about "anticipation", because you're already counting.


    Might seem strange to you, but pretty certain that this is how he did it. I'm sure he tried different spacings until he found one that worked on actual golfers.
  • HitEmTrueHitEmTrue North TexasMembers Posts: 6,305 ✭✭
    Dire Wolf wrote:


    This seems like a strange way to train tempo/rhythm/timing. In music and dance, there are "count off" beats that lead you into the actual bit. It would make much more sense to have the actual 3:1 exact ratio in beeps, with a count off of the same thing to prepare you for them. Then you don't have to guess about "anticipation", because you're already counting.




    I agree...the concept with music is a good idea, because you CAN anticipate, by having a song in your head...start the backswing on downbeat of a measure (ONE). But to have 3:1 ratio, impact must happen at downbeat ONE of the next measure, in 4/4 time. The downswing occupies the entire 4th beat of the 1st measure.
  • Mr. HerbertMr. Herbert Posts: 817 ✭✭
    crapula wrote:


    crapula wrote:

    nova6868 wrote:


    Like others have said, the beats may not be precisely 3:1.



    They account for reaction time. Mostly, the reaction time needed to transition from backswing to downswing.




    So, the idea is that everyone will be late and never notice that they are late, therefore using it correctly?




    I think he is right here. I believe the book tells you not to anticipate the beats, react to them. I am no musician, but I believe this is correct.




    This would make even less sense assuming that everyone takes 1/3 of a second to react to the first tone and still makes contact on the fourth beat. 1/3 second 8 frames. So 12 frames to transition and 10 frames to impact, a 1.2:1 ratio.






    You left out the transition time from backswing to forward. If it takes four or five frames for that transition, the ratio is around 3:1.
  • GolfzaloGolfzalo Members Posts: 37

    crapula wrote:


    crapula wrote:

    nova6868 wrote:


    Like others have said, the beats may not be precisely 3:1.



    They account for reaction time. Mostly, the reaction time needed to transition from backswing to downswing.




    So, the idea is that everyone will be late and never notice that they are late, therefore using it correctly?




    I think he is right here. I believe the book tells you not to anticipate the beats, react to them. I am no musician, but I believe this is correct.




    This would make even less sense assuming that everyone takes 1/3 of a second to react to the first tone and still makes contact on the fourth beat. 1/3 second 8 frames. So 12 frames to transition and 10 frames to impact, a 1.2:1 ratio.






    You left out the transition time from backswing to forward. If it takes four or five frames for that transition, the ratio is around 3:1.




    Come on guys, we are not talking about microseconds or missing frames...is about: 1, 2 ,3, HIT. I just got the book from a friend and the concept is that! Of course there are some off-sets but if you read the book it says it is because the time to react, not because he added extra "frames or microseconds" to make a 3:1 ratio, something that is clearly a 2:1. Conceptual the tones and the music are 2:1, everyone practising with that audio is not swinging in a 3:1 ratio.



    G
  • BrianL99BrianL99 Banned Posts: 5,116 ClubWRX
    Instead of beating this subject to death, someone should just email John. He's a very good guy and will surely respond. If he doesn't respond from his webiste, I'm sure I have his personal email address somewhere.
  • crapulacrapula Golf! Members Posts: 1,778 ✭✭
    edited Oct 11, 2012 #91


    You left out the transition time from backswing to forward. If it takes four or five frames for that transition, the ratio is around 3:1.




    So are you saying that the 3:1 ratio is incomplete?



    It should be a 4.5:1:2 ratio for (back swing:transition:down swing to impact)???
    Srixon Z 785 9.5 Project X HC HZRDUS Yellow 6.0
    Srixon Z F85 13.5 Project X HC HZRDUS Yellow 6.0
    Srixon Z H85 16 Project X HZRDUS Black 6.0
    Srixon Z 785 3-PW KBS Tour 120 S
    Cleveland RTX-3 52, 58 KBS Tour 120 S
    Odyssey Toulon Memphis Stroke Lab
    Srixon Yellow ZStar XV

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file