Jump to content
2024 Houston Open WITB Photos ×

Fighting Gravity and THE Club Weight


BB28403

Recommended Posts

Who says the physics isn't settled? You?

 

Physics is settled. The argument about the forces and torques in the golf swing are not. Michael Jacobs released his long awaited book last week. Conversation and discussion is ongoing.

 

What is/are the main disagreement(s) between the Jacobs/Nesbitt clique and the Sasho clique?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Monte is being too modest when he writes " I didn’t know anything about anything then." Monte knew the most important thing, what it feels like to swing the club really fast. Knowing that plus having a favorable genetic endowment made him at the time the longest hitter around. Has the knowledge of physics gained since he thought he was allowing his hand to drop with gravity made him any longer?

 

I don't doubt the finding of science, I just doubt that they have much to do with performing on the golf course.

 

Steve

 

I do not want to speak for Monte, but from knowing him and speaking with him I am willing to make a large wager that he will tell you that had he known more about the physics of the swing back then, we would not be taking lessons from Monte today and instead would be watching him on the Champions Tour.

 

Monte was a good player and could hit it long despite not knowing what he was doing. He sought out some "top" instructors of the day back then who also didn't understand the physics and they sent him in the wrong direction and he wasn't able to improve and stay on the Web.com. Had he known then what he knows now, he would have never gone to those "top" teachers that were also ignorant of the swing and he would have fixed his swing himself and not only stayed on the Web but advanced to the Tour most likely. Monte's swing is better today than it was then because he indeed does understand what is going on better.

Ping G430 Max 9* Fujikura Ventus Velocore Blue 6X
Ping G425 Max 14.5 Alta CB 65S
Callaway Rogue ST Max 18* Tensei Blue 75S

PXG 0211 XCOR2 5-GW
Titleist SM9  52*F 56*D and 60*D
L.A.B. Link1/Scotty Newport
Srixon Z Star XV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Monte is being too modest when he writes " I didn’t know anything about anything then." Monte knew the most important thing, what it feels like to swing the club really fast. Knowing that plus having a favorable genetic endowment made him at the time the longest hitter around. Has the knowledge of physics gained since he thought he was allowing his hand to drop with gravity made him any longer?

 

I don't doubt the finding of science, I just doubt that they have much to do with performing on the golf course.

 

Steve

 

I do not want to speak for Monte, but from knowing him and speaking with him I am willing to make a large wager that he will tell you that had he known more about the physics of the swing back then, we would not be taking lessons from Monte today and instead would be watching him on the Champions Tour.

 

Monte was a good player and could hit it long despite not knowing what he was doing. He sought out some "top" instructors of the day back then who also didn't understand the physics and they sent him in the wrong direction and he wasn't able to improve and stay on the Web.com. Had he known then what he knows now, he would have never gone to those "top" teachers that were also ignorant of the swing and he would have fixed his swing himself and not only stayed on the Web but advanced to the Tour most likely. Monte's swing is better today than it was then because he indeed does understand what is going on better.

 

Not sure if proffering a wager is a board approved activity, but what kind of wager do you have in mind?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who says the physics isn't settled? You?

 

Physics is settled. The argument about the forces and torques in the golf swing are not. Michael Jacobs released his long awaited book last week. Conversation and discussion is ongoing.

 

Although physics is not one of my areas of expertise these sentences seem to be in some degree of conflict. If physics is settled, and if torque and forces are properties within physics, why would there be disagreements. Clarify?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who says the physics isn't settled? You?

 

Physics is settled. The argument about the forces and torques in the golf swing are not. Michael Jacobs released his long awaited book last week. Conversation and discussion is ongoing.

 

Although physics is not one of my areas of expertise these sentences seem to be in some degree of conflict. If physics is settled, and if torque and forces are properties within physics, why would there be disagreements. Clarify?

 

The laws of physics are settled. The disagreement on forces and torques is because we aren't measuring them but calculating them. How the best way to do that is the debate. The main thing come down to the frame of reference to do the calculation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you've ever used an ax to cut down a tree you know it's more efficient and uses less energy to make a downward blow versus an upward blow.

 

Take a golf club and make a motion like you're swinging an ax downward into the base of a tree. Now make a motion like you're swinging an ax upward into the base of a tree. Which motion feels smoother? Which motion would create less wear and tear on your body?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you've ever used an ax to cut down a tree you know it's more efficient and uses less energy to make a downward blow versus an upward blow.

 

Take a golf club and make a motion like you're swinging an ax downward into the base of a tree. Now make a motion like you're swinging an ax upward into the base of a tree. Which motion feels smoother? Which motion would create less wear and tear on your body?

 

You can’t swing an ax upward at the base of a tree. And the golfswing is nothing like swinging an ax, not only is it exponentially lighter but the AOA isn’t 45* in a golf swing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you've ever used an ax to cut down a tree you know it's more efficient and uses less energy to make a downward blow versus an upward blow.

 

Take a golf club and make a motion like you're swinging an ax downward into the base of a tree. Now make a motion like you're swinging an ax upward into the base of a tree. Which motion feels smoother? Which motion would create less wear and tear on your body?

 

I swing up and down to cut down a tree to make a V.

Srixon Z 785 9.5 Atmos Tour Spec Black 60X
Srixon Z F85 15 Atmos Tour Spec Black 60X
Srixon Z U85 18 Steelfiber i110 S
Srixon Z FORGED 3-9 Steelfiber i110 S
Cleveland RTX4 46 Steelfiber i110 S
Cleveland RTX4 Forged 50 Steelfiber i125 S
Cleveland RTX4 58 Steelfiber i125 S
Cleveland Huntington Beach Soft Premier 11S

Bettinardi QB6 DASS High Polish
Srixon ZStar XV Yellow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does either camp factor in gravity helping/hurting the motion of the club relative to the forces applied by the golfer?

 

Forget about the club for one moment.

 

To understand and feel more principles take notice of contemporary dance. A style which developed mid 20th century in reaction to ballet.

It is basically the opposite. Contemporary dance shows what gravity in motion is all about.

As a taught art form the lingo for the basics are stronger and better pronounced compared to golf.

Learning to 'stack' the body in motion and feel the balance in off balance positions is stuff very common for this art form.

 

If a player wonders how to go from flexion to extension back into flexion and extension sure a player can do so without the awareness of gravity and momentum.

Yet the instant the player feels gravity as a force the mechanics will be super fluid. Or natural.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Jacobs

 

March 7 at 1:07 PM

 

I would have hoped that they could have figured this out by now, but they need a lot of help apparently.

The Space Frame and the User Frame BOTH MUST EXIST to be able to do a 3D analysis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Jacobs

 

March 7 at 1:07 PM

 

I would have hoped that they could have figured this out by now, but they need a lot of help apparently.

 

 

 

 

 

53410264_2366016023416742_7669165643224055808_o.jpg?_nc_cat=106&_nc_ht=scontent.fykz1-1.fna&oh=0f757b2d90b46a48ecde1661148cdbe6&oe=5D206812

 

Completely disingenuous. When brian and sasho were discussing at one point years ago, sasho suggested the reference frames being used might be different and brian insisted they were the same. I think it's an interesting idea but am really not sure it is necessary or useful. That isn't said to dismiss it. Still processing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Jacobs

 

March 7 at 1:07 PM

 

I would have hoped that they could have figured this out by now, but they need a lot of help apparently.

The Space Frame and the User Frame BOTH MUST EXIST to be able to do a 3D analysis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Jacobs

 

March 7 at 1:07 PM

 

I would have hoped that they could have figured this out by now, but they need a lot of help apparently.

 

 

 

 

 

53410264_2366016023416742_7669165643224055808_o.jpg?_nc_cat=106&_nc_ht=scontent.fykz1-1.fna&oh=0f757b2d90b46a48ecde1661148cdbe6&oe=5D206812

 

Completely disingenuous. When brian and sasho were discussing at one point years ago, sasho suggested the reference frames being used might be different and brian insisted they were the same. I think it's an interesting idea but am really not sure it is necessary or useful. That isn't said to dismiss it. Still processing.

 

Manzella isn't the one who wrote the book or developed the 3d system for Jacobs 3d...so there's that. Plus Sasho hasn't written/published one single paper on this. Just social media campaigning. If Sasho knew about the reference frames why couldn't he figure it out, the truth is the book is without error and Finney and Sasho can't handle that fact. Nesbit is in a different league when it comes to 3d.

 

Someone should remind brian he didn't write the book. Have seen him say WE wrote this and WE published.

 

Fact is sasho suspected the moving reference frames and BRIAN told him he was wrong. The book is different than how it was described for years. Book is right about how they are doing the math. I am going to quote a well known teacher when I asked him his thoughts on the changing frames of reference "Not that interesting. If that’s what it’s all been about then this is ridiculous"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some trivia for anyone following. Who is the guy talking in the video I posted?

Thanks everyone for chiming in, and the heavy weight teachers. Always nice to hear from the pros in the trenches.

Keep posting! Comment down below... kidding

 

I may have missed it reading thru the thread, but I didn't see where anyone answered your question. It is Pete Cowen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Jacobs

 

March 7 at 1:07 PM

 

I would have hoped that they could have figured this out by now, but they need a lot of help apparently.

The Space Frame and the User Frame BOTH MUST EXIST to be able to do a 3D analysis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Jacobs

 

March 7 at 1:07 PM

 

I would have hoped that they could have figured this out by now, but they need a lot of help apparently.

 

 

 

 

 

53410264_2366016023416742_7669165643224055808_o.jpg?_nc_cat=106&_nc_ht=scontent.fykz1-1.fna&oh=0f757b2d90b46a48ecde1661148cdbe6&oe=5D206812

 

Completely disingenuous. When brian and sasho were discussing at one point years ago, sasho suggested the reference frames being used might be different and brian insisted they were the same. I think it's an interesting idea but am really not sure it is necessary or useful. That isn't said to dismiss it. Still processing.

 

Manzella isn't the one who wrote the book or developed the 3d system for Jacobs 3d...so there's that. Plus Sasho hasn't written/published one single paper on this. Just social media campaigning. If Sasho knew about the reference frames why couldn't he figure it out, the truth is the book is without error and Finney and Sasho can't handle that fact. Nesbit is in a different league when it comes to 3d.

 

Someone should remind brian he didn't write the book. Have seen him say WE wrote this and WE published.

 

Fact is sasho suspected the moving reference frames and BRIAN told him he was wrong. The book is different than how it was described for years. Book is right about how they are doing the math. I am going to quote a well known teacher when I asked him his thoughts on the changing frames of reference "Not that interesting. If that's what it's all been about then this is ridiculous"

 

 

Someone should remind SASHO he got it wrong! It's not just about frames of reference and if it's not that interesting why the Alpha War for 5 years and continuing to this day. It's funny that they couldn't figure it out but now it's like" it's how they are doing the math" You quoted a well known teacher? Nesbit is the premier phd on this he wrote and published many scientific papers and you get a well known teacher saying it's not that interesting .... That's a joke!

 

The math is the math it's either correct or not, Nesbit doesn't own it, Sasho had 5 years and couldn't get it right, he wrote nothing and published nothing , and why would Manzella tell them and give away Jacobs 3d it's a I.Property. Sasho is a competitor and he wanted the keys to the vault.... too bad they are wrong and now Sasho is stuck with the fact he went around saying the right hand slows the club down and there is only basically a check swing at the bottom.....now that's ridiculous!!

 

The did their analysis in 2d and that's the reason they couldn't figure it out, that's the reason for the user frame and space frame it's 3d analysis and you must have both frames... end of story...oh and there is no putting in early torque and coasting not happening!

 

You guys never go off script. You're one of 3 people Silva, feltman, or Jacobs himself. My money is on feltman. Not many sweaters to sell right now. What's funny is how you think the other guys view you versus how they actually view you. Nobody was trying to "steal" anything ,and it isn't a "war" just because 2 guys on one side keep calling it that. End of the day...it's a different way to measure. Like I said, I think it's interesting to think about but end of the day I just don't know if it's really of any value or really all that helpful. We will see

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A different way to measure, that's priceless! The truth is it's the correct 3d analysis, that's the reason Sasho couldn't figure it out, if it was simply a different way to measure you would think a PHD could do the analysis and come up with the answer. And that different way to measure shows that Sasho got it wrong so there's that! If you go around teaching something that is wrong it matters Sasho got it wrong and went around the world telling people the incorrect information... that's a big deal!

 

No one mentioned stealing anything, how could they steal it? They just wanted Jacobs or Manzella to give it to them. Sasho called Nesbit at the start of this and asked Nesbit for help and Nesbit declined... that's a fact.

 

 

You're a teacher so if you get the wrong info and teach it you might want to have the correct version when it's available... but hey maybe you don't. Personally I like info that is correct but that's just me.

 

Oh and I'm fairly confident the " other side" views this side exactly the way they say they do on the golf Biomechanist facebook group.

 

Who did Jacobs try and hire at one point early in all of this to help him and who turned him down?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[media=]

[/media]

 

At 16:15 he says that in every swing there is a negative beta force requiring a positive alpha torque into impact. Did he misspeak??

 

 

You're a member of their facebook group, ask him. I personally did not hear him say that "in every swing" at 16:15

 

He said "you're ALWAYS gonna get a negative beta force"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need to get Newtonian PULL Gravity out of our minds.

 

Gravity has a massive effect on a golf swing.

 

If you think Gravity is an effortless drop then you are ignoring the full effect of what Gravity is.

 

Gravity is all about Mass and relationships in motion. The storing of energy into mass on Earth is what Gravity is all about.

 

FD,

 

Please allow me to make some revisions to your statements.

 

In the realm of Newtonian mechanics, gravity is a force - the kind that accelerates an apple to the ground, that keeps the earth in orbit around the sun. Momentum is that quantity "stored" in a mass and it is exactly mass x velocity in motion, not gravity. A force applied to a mass adds momentum to that mass - it is like a flow of momentum into and out of a mass. A torque is like a force but rather a flow of angular momentum that causes mass to rotate.

 

Twirling a mass at the end of a string and that mass seems to defy earth gravity and "flies" horizontally. Same phenomenon when a girl twirls a hoola hoop around her waist. What gives? Do we need this sort of "flying" in a good golf swing?

 

Alpha, beta, gamma torques effect rotations of the club around the hands in 3D in the frame of reference of the hands. The frame of reference of the hands is not an inertial frame for the hands do not move in 3D space with constant velocity. My concept is that alpha and beta torques are induced torques from the motion of the hands not from the direct actions of the hands themselves. The motion of the hands is the result of the motions of the lead shoulder and the trail elbow. So it is much more beneficial to study the motions of the lead shoulder and the trail elbow and to study the actions of the pivot that drive those motions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Discussion and links to Photos
      Please put any questions or Comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Monday #1
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Monday #2
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #1
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #2
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #3
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Thorbjorn Olesen - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Ben Silverman - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jesse Droemer - SoTX PGA Section POY - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      David Lipsky - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Martin Trainer - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Zac Blair - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jacob Bridgeman - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Trace Crowe - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jimmy Walker - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Daniel Berger - WITB(very mini) - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Chesson Hadley - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Callum McNeill - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Rhein Gibson - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Patrick Fishburn - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Peter Malnati - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Raul Pereda - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Gary Woodland WITB (New driver, iron shafts) – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Padraig Harrington WITB – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      Tom Hoge's custom Cameron - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Piretti putters - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Ping putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Kevin Dougherty's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Bettinardi putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Erik Barnes testing an all-black Axis1 putter – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Tony Finau's new driver shaft – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
       
       
       
       
       
      • 7 replies
    • 2024 Valspar Championship WITB Photos (Thanks to bvmagic)- Discussion & Links to Photos
      This weeks WITB Pics are from member bvmagic (Brian). Brian's first event for WRX was in 2008 at Bayhill while in college. Thanks so much bv.
       
      Please put your comments or question on this thread. Links to all the threads are below...
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 31 replies
    • 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #3
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Matt (LFG) Every - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Sahith Theegala - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Cameron putters (and new "LD" grip) - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Bettinardi MB & CB irons - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Bettinardi API putter cover - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Swag API covers - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Golf Pride Reverse Taper grips - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 15 replies
    • 2024 Cognizant Classic - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #1
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #2
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #3
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #4
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Brandt Snedeker - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Max Greyserman - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Eric Cole - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Carl Yuan - WITb - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Russell Henley - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Justin Sun - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alex Noren - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Shane Lowry - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Taylor Montgomery - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jake Knapp (KnappTime_ltd) - WITB - - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Super Stoke Pistol Lock 1.0 & 2.0 grips - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      LA Golf new insert putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Garsen Quad Tour 15 grip - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Swag covers - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jacob Bridgeman's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Bud Cauley's custom Cameron putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Ryo Hisatsune's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Chris Kirk - new black Callaway Apex CB irons and a few Odyssey putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alejandro Tosti's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 2 replies
    • 2024 Genesis Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #3
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #4
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Rory McIlroy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Sepp Straka - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Patrick Rodgers - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Brendon Todd - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Denny McCarthy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Corey Conners - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Chase Johnson - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tommy Fleetwood - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Matt Fitzpatrick - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Si Woo Kim - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Viktor Hovland - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Wyndham Clark - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Cam Davis - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Nick Taylor - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Ben Baller WITB update (New putter, driver, hybrid and shafts) – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Vortex Golf rangefinder - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Fujikura Ventus shaft - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods & TaylorMade "Sun Day Red" apparel launch event, product photos – 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods Sun Day Red golf shoes - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Aretera shafts - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Toulon putters - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods' new white "Sun Day Red" golf shoe prototypes – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      • 22 replies

×
×
  • Create New...