Oceans Eleven Confessions to break a man's heart....

[scotee]

Happy #10 brah........and I concur with your conclusion, a blunt object is less

prone to digging while a sharp object is more prone, given the same attack

angle and path.

 

If you understood the complete physics, you would also understand that the blunt object slows down significantly in the process of "digging less". The ball doesn't care if the clubhead is digging or not if the velocity has dropped off. It's all about the velocity of the clubface going into the ball. At least it is in my world of physics.

 

I have little business arguing as the math and physics I studied was years ago and mostly went in one ear and out the other on the way to my chosen profession BUT……… As I see it the blunt object can and does continue to move along at a fast rate but glances off of the turf and slides under the ball without digging.

[Michael C.]

Thanks for all the well wishes, my friends! It's appreciated.

 

I, also, appreciate that we can have respectful debates. The offering of different points of view in this respectful manner is kind of an anomaly on this forum. It's too bad, too. A lot can be learned in a spirited, but respectful, sharing of thoughts and ideas.

 

Y'all be cool,

MC out! :drag: :D

 

[Chief Illiniwek]

I missed it too! Happy 10th MC!

[DeNinny]

Happy #10 brah........and I concur with your conclusion, a blunt object is less

prone to digging while a sharp object is more prone, given the same attack

angle and path.

 

If you understood the complete physics, you would also understand that the blunt object slows down significantly in the process of "digging less". The ball doesn't care if the clubhead is digging or not if the velocity has dropped off. It's all about the velocity of the clubface going into the ball. At least it is in my world of physics.

 

I have little business arguing as the math and physics I studied was years ago and mostly went in one ear and out the other on the way to my chosen profession BUT……… As I see it the blunt object can and does continue to move along at a fast rate but glances off of the turf and slides under the ball without digging.

 

And if I didn't understand the complete physics with math included, I might have agreed with you. In fact, before I started really evaluating this, I was exactly under the same understanding. As I applied the "math" or at least the equations and how the math works out, my whole world view of bounce changed. The key for me was doing a "deeper dive".

 

So based on your anecdotal observation about that blunt object "glancing" into the ball without loss of velocity, what makes you think that the "digging" club loses any more velocity? In particular, over ONLY a VERY short distance. Is it another anecdotal observation that "to dig" (over distances of a fraction of fractions of an inch) is so much slower? (Any conclusion made from this question without evaluating the "math" is speculative at best.)

 

I will also elaborate more in response to MJ tonight.

[SixtySomePing]

A fraction of an inch out of the sand to me is the difference between a one hop and stop AND a ball that rolls 15 ft passed the hole.

 

What do I know? I believe the earth is round yet...it sure seems pretty flat. Of course I live in Illinois. :D

 

Edit: Good Night, Ninja. :D

 

If you believein that much significance, then those same fractions then are making a difference on the drag (through any media) and on increasing the chances of a skulled or fat shot. The same design that enabled the "benefit" you claim as so significant consequently enabled the same DETRIMENTS.

 

Clean ball contact is the first priority and the rounded leading edge and lowered rounded bottom are DETRIMENTS to that. Again this is significant to the performance by those same "fractions of an inch" that help you so much out of the sand. You cannot only acknowledge part of the science. Science doesn't work that way.

 

I don't believe anyone is denying the science. It's the interpretation. I say benefit. You say detriment.

 

The reason you open the face for a bunker shot in fluffy sand is to expose more bounce (which conceptually makes the flange wider) is to help keep the club from digging.

 

This same design also provides forgiveness off the turf. It digs less allowing more energy to go into the ball. Does a sharper leading edge fit into the void better? Yes, but if the turf is contacted with a sharp edge compared to a rounded edge, the sharper edge will dig more. The rounded edge will resist digging and will be more prone to skid into the same void. That is, all things being equal on a shot that is hit slightly heavy.

 

Clean contact? Doesn't matter.

 

I'd rather dig with a shovel that has a sharp edge and cut a steak with a sharp knife. Why? Because a rounded edge resists cutting.

 

Ninja, my friend, I won't go as far as to say you're wrong BUT, you haven't convinced me that I'm not right. ;)

 

On a lighter note, today is Cinco de Mayo (I think I spelled that correctly) and more importantly, Mrs C and I's 10th anniversary.

 

I need a nap.

 

Buenos Noches!!

 

Wow, good for you! #10 and on Cinco de Mayo... feliz aniversario! .... Happy Anniversary :)

 

Nice change of Avatar there SSP, along with photo shop to boot. lol

 

Thank you, I wanted it to look a little more chincy but I figured that would do :taunt:

[DeNinny]

Also scoteef, again watch the video I posted to Matt J. During impact, look how far (which is EXTREMELY short) the clubhead travels when in contact with the ball. With that, you really think a few degrees of curvature on the bottom of the club is making a difference?

[DeNinny]

Thanks for all the well wishes, my friends! It's appreciated.

 

I, also, appreciate that we can have respectful debates. The offering of different points of view in this respectful manner is kind of an anomaly on this forum. It's too bad, too. A lot can be learned in a spirited, but respectful, sharing of thoughts and ideas.

 

Y'all be cool,

MC out! :drag: :D

 

LOL MC is gonna "get some" tonight.

 

I would much rather respectfully argue for 100 pages with 'yoos guys' than spend an iota of time responding to some narrow minded equipment or I&A forum troll.

 

And realize that I'm trying to help you better understand the physics. You WILL NOT learn the complete physics through "conventional wisdom" espoused by the same folks that make high bounce or "forgiving" clubs. Their "physics" is often incomplete.

[Palauan Hammer]

Tooled

 

Happy 10th MC :D

 

 

Edit: I'm not smart enough to debate BUT I do enjoy reading and learning :)

[mdgboxx]

Happy #10 brah........and I concur with your conclusion, a blunt object is less

prone to digging while a sharp object is more prone, given the same attack

angle and path.

 

If you understood the complete physics, you would also understand that the blunt object slows down significantly in the process of "digging less". The ball doesn't care if the clubhead is digging or not if the velocity has dropped off. It's all about the velocity of the clubface going into the ball. At least it is in my world of physics.

 

Until today, I had 25+ pages to read through to be up to date in our Confessions thread.

 

As usual, we jumped topic to topic, either to vent or make sense of things that caught our attention.

 

As usual, it is done with an open mind, void of aggressive reactions, and......wait for it...........TROLLS! :fie:

 

I confess, however, that I wondered, if only for a split second, if I hadn't tripped on my shoelaces and landed in a I&A forum. The level of exchange, quickly brought me back to our reality. It also brought me back in time, to the early '70, at the Apex Technical School of Refrigeration after a periodic exam.

One of my fellow students, who had barely made the grade, challenged the teacher about a wrong answer he was given, when he (student) was convinced he was right. The teacher angrily replied:

 

"Physics is the ONLY science that is NOT negotiable"!

 

It made complete sense to me b/c of something completely irrelevant, out of the box and off topic: The daily *The Amazing Kreskin Show*

 

He would open and close the show in saying: "The unnatural is nothing more than the natural that we have yet to explain"

 

Although I never got further than HVAC tech, it gave me a whole other perspective of science, beliefs and life itself.

 

Far be it from me to put a Physicist on a pedestal, but I would consider his findings/decisions easier to swallow than most politicians and judges, excluding Reasonability, of course.

 

IMHO, Physics is *common sense* explained.

 

PLZ, consider this, the end of my rant for this week. :wave:

 

 

EDIT:

 

I posted this in reply to post # 4693, by DeNinny. Any mention of trolls and other opinions is purely coincidental and unpremeditated.

[billh17]

A fraction of an inch out of the sand to me is the difference between a one hop and stop AND a ball that rolls 15 ft passed the hole.

 

What do I know? I believe the earth is round yet...it sure seems pretty flat. Of course I live in Illinois. :D

 

Edit: Good Night, Ninja. :D

 

If you believein that much significance, then those same fractions then are making a difference on the drag (through any media) and on increasing the chances of a skulled or fat shot. The same design that enabled the "benefit" you claim as so significant consequently enabled the same DETRIMENTS.

 

Clean ball contact is the first priority and the rounded leading edge and lowered rounded bottom are DETRIMENTS to that. Again this is significant to the performance by those same "fractions of an inch" that help you so much out of the sand. You cannot only acknowledge part of the science. Science doesn't work that way.

 

I don't believe anyone is denying the science. It's the interpretation. I say benefit. You say detriment.

 

The reason you open the face for a bunker shot in fluffy sand is to expose more bounce (which conceptually makes the flange wider) is to help keep the club from digging.

 

This same design also provides forgiveness off the turf. It digs less allowing more energy to go into the ball. Does a sharper leading edge fit into the void better? Yes, but if the turf is contacted with a sharp edge compared to a rounded edge, the sharper edge will dig more. The rounded edge will resist digging and will be more prone to skid into the same void. That is, all things being equal on a shot that is hit slightly heavy.

 

Clean contact? Doesn't matter.

 

I'd rather dig with a shovel that has a sharp edge and cut a steak with a sharp knife. Why? Because a rounded edge resists cutting.

 

Ninja, my friend, I won't go as far as to say you're wrong BUT, you haven't convinced me that I'm not right. ;)

 

On a lighter note, today is Cinco de Mayo (I think I spelled that correctly) and more importantly, Mrs C and I's 10th anniversary.

 

I need a nap.

 

Buenos Noches!!

Happy 10th to both of ya ! Many more wished for you

[Conrad1953]

Happy #10 brah........and I concur with your conclusion, a blunt object is less

prone to digging while a sharp object is more prone, given the same attack

angle and path.

 

If you understood the complete physics, you would also understand that the blunt object slows down significantly in the process of "digging less". The ball doesn't care if the clubhead is digging or not if the velocity has dropped off. It's all about the velocity of the clubface going into the ball. At least it is in my world of physics.

 

Um.....wait a minute, lol.

 

The sharp edge that is digging may result in the club never directly

contacting the ball but instead the dirt and turf moves the ball.

 

The blunt edge that glances off the ground will still contact the ball.

 

You're only talking about speed but not addressing how the path is

changed with a sharp edge vs a duller edge.

 

In the case above the digging club will lose vastly more speed than

one that is glancing but also the glancing club still has a chance to

hit the ball whereas the digging one may not hit the ball at all.

 

EDIT: TOOLed!

[DeNinny]

Happy #10 brah........and I concur with your conclusion, a blunt object is less

prone to digging while a sharp object is more prone, given the same attack

angle and path.

 

If you understood the complete physics, you would also understand that the blunt object slows down significantly in the process of "digging less". The ball doesn't care if the clubhead is digging or not if the velocity has dropped off. It's all about the velocity of the clubface going into the ball. At least it is in my world of physics.

 

Until today, I had 25+ pages to read through to be up to date in our Confessions thread.

 

As usual, we jumped topic to topic, either to vent or make sense of things that caught our attention.

 

As usual, it is done with an open mind, void of aggressive reactions, and......wait for it...........TROLLS! :fie:

 

I confess, however, that I wondered, if only for a split second, if I hadn't tripped on my shoelaces and landed in a I&A forum. The level of exchange, quickly brought me back to our reality. It also brought me back in time, to the early '70, at the Apex Technical School of Refrigeration after a periodic exam.

One of my fellow students, who had barely made the grade, challenged the teacher about a wrong answer he was given, when he (student) was convinced he was right. The teacher angrily replied:

 

"Physics is the ONLY science that is NOT negotiable"!

 

It made complete sense to me b/c of something completely irrelevant, out of the box and off topic: The daily *The Amazing Kreskin Show*

 

He would open and close the show in saying: "The unnatural is nothing more than the natural that we have yet to explain"

 

Although I never got further than HVAC tech, it gave me a whole other perspective of science, beliefs and life itself.

 

Far be it from me to put a Physicist on a pedestal, but I would consider his findings/decisions easier to swallow than most politicians and judges, excluding Reasonability, of course.

 

IMHO, Physics is *common sense* explained.

 

PLZ, consider this, the end of my rant for this week. :wave:

 

 

EDIT:

 

I posted this in reply to post # 4693, by DeNinny. Any mention of trolls and other opinions is purely coincidental and unpremeditated.

As mentioned I'm simply trying to broaden the understanding of the physics. I'm trying to help everybody. Every single one of my points and conclusions is fully backed by the laws of science. If not, provide some other basis and let's see where the gap really is. Otherwise, it is pure "faith" that anybody disagrees. At best it is only partial science.

 

I challenge ANYBODY, prove to me, with scientific theory, how a metal clubhead travelling up to 100mph is going to hit SOFT ground and somehow change direction, WITHOUT slowing down, and somehow this is better than a clubhead that "digs" for FRACTIONS of fractions of an inch. I double, no triple, dog dare ANYBODY!!!

 

(Please also note that I have tried to prove myself wrong a million times already. I have evaluated the physics numerous ways and the "forgiveness" of high bounce is not supported by the laws of physics. It has become common sense to me that it is the opposite for reasons repeatedly stated...High bounce ALWAYS slows the clubhead down. High bounce does NOT dig less. High bounce increases the chance of hitting the ball fat and skulling it...ALL OTHER THINGS EQUAL!

[DeNinny]

Happy #10 brah........and I concur with your conclusion, a blunt object is less

prone to digging while a sharp object is more prone, given the same attack

angle and path.

 

If you understood the complete physics, you would also understand that the blunt object slows down significantly in the process of "digging less". The ball doesn't care if the clubhead is digging or not if the velocity has dropped off. It's all about the velocity of the clubface going into the ball. At least it is in my world of physics.

 

Um.....wait a minute, lol.

 

The sharp edge that is digging may result in the club never directly

contacting the ball but instead the dirt and turf moves the ball.

 

The blunt edge that glances off the ground will still contact the ball.

 

You're only talking about speed but not addressing how the path is

changed with a sharp edge vs a duller edge.

 

In the case above the digging club will lose vastly more speed than

one that is glancing but also the glancing club still has a chance to

hit the ball whereas the digging one may not hit the ball at all.

 

EDIT: TOOLed!

 

You just made my point again. You claimed many things without backing any of it. LOTS of assumptions were made simply because you don't understand the full physics.

 

You might want to provide something a little more substantial than "a digging club slows down more". Or "a high bounce club will deflect and not dig for sure". Both of these demonstrate my point about not fully evaluating the physics.

 

Also see my video link to matt j showing the VERY short time and distance of impact. And see my point earlier to mdg about providing some "proof" how a metal clubhead travelling at 100 mph will "deflect" instead of dig through SOFT ground.

 

And you also may want to wait until after I provide more details to Matt Js earlier post.

[Michael C.]

This is what I could find on the subject. Are they experts? Depends on your definition. Do they have degrees and a COMPLETE understanding of physics? IDK

 

Read and decide for yourselves.

 

http://www.publinksgolfer.net/articles/125/1/Wedge-Bounce,-Setting-it-Straight/Page1.html

 

http://www.customfitting.co.uk/all/pg-lab/explaining-wedge-bounce/

 

http://wishongolf.com/the-wedge-the-scoring-weapon-of-tour-players/

 

http://www.golfclub-technology.com/golfwedges.html

 

;)

[DeNinny]

This is what I could find on the subject. Are they experts? Depends on your definition. Do they have degrees and a COMPLETE understanding of physics? IDK

 

Read and decide for yourselves.

 

http://www.publinksgolfer.net/articles/125/1/Wedge-Bounce,-Setting-it-Straight/Page1.html

 

http://www.customfitting.co.uk/all/pg-lab/explaining-wedge-bounce/

 

http://wishongolf.com/the-wedge-the-scoring-weapon-of-tour-players/

 

http://www.golfclub-technology.com/golfwedges.html

 

;)

 

There's a lot of marketing expertise in all of this. But the science is no different than what you/others have brought up already. Did you notice they were all from the perspective of a club manufacturer in the business of selling various bounce clubs? It's kinda like George Foreman espousing how great his grill is...

 

So much to refute. So little time. Just see all my points already made.

 

An independent study would have a little more credibility.

[Conrad1953]

Happy #10 brah........and I concur with your conclusion, a blunt object is less

prone to digging while a sharp object is more prone, given the same attack

angle and path.

 

If you understood the complete physics, you would also understand that the blunt object slows down significantly in the process of "digging less". The ball doesn't care if the clubhead is digging or not if the velocity has dropped off. It's all about the velocity of the clubface going into the ball. At least it is in my world of physics.

 

Um.....wait a minute, lol.

 

The sharp edge that is digging may result in the club never directly

contacting the ball but instead the dirt and turf moves the ball.

 

The blunt edge that glances off the ground will still contact the ball.

 

You're only talking about speed but not addressing how the path is

changed with a sharp edge vs a duller edge.

 

In the case above the digging club will lose vastly more speed than

one that is glancing but also the glancing club still has a chance to

hit the ball whereas the digging one may not hit the ball at all.

 

EDIT: TOOLed!

 

You just made my point again. You claimed many things without backing any of it. LOTS of assumptions were made simply because you don't understand the full physics.

 

You might want to provide something a little more substantial than "a digging club slows down more". Or "a high bounce club will deflect and not dig for sure". Both of these demonstrate my point about not fully evaluating the physics.

 

Also see my video link to matt j showing the VERY short time and distance of impact. And see my point earlier to mdg about providing some "proof" how a metal clubhead travelling at 100 mph will "deflect" instead of dig through SOFT ground.

 

And you also may want to wait until after I provide more details to Matt Js earlier post.

 

You're threw in SOFT ground there at the end. Please define what soft ground is.

 

I'm not an agronomist but have some general notions of turf and soil.

[mdgboxx]

Happy #10 brah........and I concur with your conclusion, a blunt object is less

prone to digging while a sharp object is more prone, given the same attack

angle and path.

 

If you understood the complete physics, you would also understand that the blunt object slows down significantly in the process of "digging less". The ball doesn't care if the clubhead is digging or not if the velocity has dropped off. It's all about the velocity of the clubface going into the ball. At least it is in my world of physics.

 

Until today, I had 25+ pages to read through to be up to date in our Confessions thread.

 

As usual, we jumped topic to topic, either to vent or make sense of things that caught our attention.

 

As usual, it is done with an open mind, void of aggressive reactions, and......wait for it...........TROLLS! :fie:

 

I confess, however, that I wondered, if only for a split second, if I hadn't tripped on my shoelaces and landed in a I&A forum. The level of exchange, quickly brought me back to our reality. It also brought me back in time, to the early '70, at the Apex Technical School of Refrigeration after a periodic exam.

One of my fellow students, who had barely made the grade, challenged the teacher about a wrong answer he was given, when he (student) was convinced he was right. The teacher angrily replied:

 

"Physics is the ONLY science that is NOT negotiable"!

 

It made complete sense to me b/c of something completely irrelevant, out of the box and off topic: The daily *The Amazing Kreskin Show*

 

He would open and close the show in saying: "The unnatural is nothing more than the natural that we have yet to explain"

 

Although I never got further than HVAC tech, it gave me a whole other perspective of science, beliefs and life itself.

 

Far be it from me to put a Physicist on a pedestal, but I would consider his findings/decisions easier to swallow than most politicians and judges, excluding Reasonability, of course.

 

IMHO, Physics is *common sense* explained.

 

PLZ, consider this, the end of my rant for this week. :wave:

 

 

EDIT:

 

I posted this in reply to post # 4693, by DeNinny. Any mention of trolls and other opinions is purely coincidental and unpremeditated.

As mentioned I'm simply trying to broaden the understanding of the physics. I'm trying to help everybody. Every single one of my points and conclusions is fully backed by the laws of science. If not, provide some other basis and let's see where the gap really is. Otherwise, it is pure "faith" that anybody disagrees. At best it is only partial science.

 

I challenge ANYBODY, prove to me, with scientific theory, how a metal clubhead travelling up to 100mph is going to hit SOFT ground and somehow change direction, WITHOUT slowing down, and somehow this is better than a clubhead that "digs" for FRACTIONS of fractions of an inch. I double, no triple, dog dare ANYBODY!!!

 

(Please also note that I have tried to prove myself wrong a million times already. I have evaluated the physics numerous ways and the "forgiveness" of high bounce is not supported by the laws of physics. It has become common sense to me that it is the opposite for reasons repeatedly stated...High bounce ALWAYS slows the clubhead down. High bounce does NOT dig less. High bounce increases the chance of hitting the ball fat and skulling it...ALL OTHER THINGS EQUAL!

 

My approach to understanding a theory is to take myself out of context, look/think outside the box, something I am familiar with, and apply that specific common sense to said theory.

 

In the subject being discussed, I imagine an aircraft propelled forward by power engines.

It requires more power to fly from NYC to LA than it does in the opposite direction. Why? The Jet Stream. It blows from West to East....And the plane is floating on air.

 

Conclusion: Anything more solid than air WILL slow anything down exponentially.

 

To add to the confusion,

 

Using my own clubs, I know for a fact that, if I lay up ±10 yds from the green, in a clover patch, I will have to stroke at the ball much harder to get it to the middle of the green than I would if I was in the fairway/first cut....With the same club.

 

Bounce however, IMHO, is something I would have to adapt to, if I was putting a new set of wedges with different specs, in play.

 

What works "perfect" for me, could drive you insane if you gamed them without practice/adaptation.

[Palauan Hammer]

Rad, the LPGA ladies are teeing it up at the Senator Course this week, I'd love to watch but coverage is @230am local time here soooo. Also was lurking in the "hardest courses in the US" thread and the Judge course came up quite a bit. I'm definitely gonna have to come check you out someday and I'll play the tips just so I can try to break a 100 lol. Hopefully we see each other while playing the round too! :taunt:

[DeNinny]

Happy #10 brah........and I concur with your conclusion, a blunt object is less

prone to digging while a sharp object is more prone, given the same attack

angle and path.

 

If you understood the complete physics, you would also understand that the blunt object slows down significantly in the process of "digging less". The ball doesn't care if the clubhead is digging or not if the velocity has dropped off. It's all about the velocity of the clubface going into the ball. At least it is in my world of physics.

 

Um.....wait a minute, lol.

 

The sharp edge that is digging may result in the club never directly

contacting the ball but instead the dirt and turf moves the ball.

 

The blunt edge that glances off the ground will still contact the ball.

 

You're only talking about speed but not addressing how the path is

changed with a sharp edge vs a duller edge.

 

In the case above the digging club will lose vastly more speed than

one that is glancing but also the glancing club still has a chance to

hit the ball whereas the digging one may not hit the ball at all.

 

EDIT: TOOLed!

 

You just made my point again. You claimed many things without backing any of it. LOTS of assumptions were made simply because you don't understand the full physics.

 

You might want to provide something a little more substantial than "a digging club slows down more". Or "a high bounce club will deflect and not dig for sure". Both of these demonstrate my point about not fully evaluating the physics.

 

Also see my video link to matt j showing the VERY short time and distance of impact. And see my point earlier to mdg about providing some "proof" how a metal clubhead travelling at 100 mph will "deflect" instead of dig through SOFT ground.

 

And you also may want to wait until after I provide more details to Matt Js earlier post.

 

You're threw in SOFT ground there at the end. Please define what soft ground is.

 

I'm not an agronomist but have some general notions of turf and soil.

 

To a metal clubhead at 100 mph, 90% of golf turf is SOFT. You may want to compare the density of carbon steel to that of dirt.

 

Food for thought (until I get to matt js post): How much ground will get compacted before it will stop or deflect a metal clubhead traveling at 100 mph? Does is start deflecting immediately? Is it less than an inch? 1/4"? 1/32"? As an estimate, you could take a club and simply try to hammer the ground.

 

Then compare this to how "different" the bounce is between a high and low bounce club. This difference is MINISCULE compared to how much the turf compresses.

 

And then even sleep on this before responding.

[Conrad1953]

Rad, the LPGA ladies are teeing it up at the Senator Course this week, I'd love to watch but coverage is @230am local time here soooo. Also was lurking in the "hardest courses in the US" thread and the Judge course came up quite a bit. I'm definitely gonna have to come check you out someday and I'll play the tips just so I can try to break a 100 lol. Hopefully we see each other while playing the round too! :taunt:

 

Haha, that would be awesome! And keep mentioning it, lol, since I'm working

on getting MC down here this summer. I think he's dying to play the Judge

from the tips. :D

[Michael C.]

 It's kinda like George Foreman espousing how great his grill is...

 

 

...or Miura espousing how great their forgings are...

 

Teehee! :D

 

Yeah, I'm bein' a stinker! Call it 'The Butterscotch Effect'

 

 

TOOLED!

[Conrad1953]

 

 

If you understood the complete physics, you would also understand that the blunt object slows down significantly in the process of "digging less". The ball doesn't care if the clubhead is digging or not if the velocity has dropped off. It's all about the velocity of the clubface going into the ball. At least it is in my world of physics.

 

Um.....wait a minute, lol.

 

The sharp edge that is digging may result in the club never directly

contacting the ball but instead the dirt and turf moves the ball.

 

The blunt edge that glances off the ground will still contact the ball.

 

You're only talking about speed but not addressing how the path is

changed with a sharp edge vs a duller edge.

 

In the case above the digging club will lose vastly more speed than

one that is glancing but also the glancing club still has a chance to

hit the ball whereas the digging one may not hit the ball at all.

 

EDIT: TOOLed!

 

You just made my point again. You claimed many things without backing any of it. LOTS of assumptions were made simply because you don't understand the full physics.

 

You might want to provide something a little more substantial than "a digging club slows down more". Or "a high bounce club will deflect and not dig for sure". Both of these demonstrate my point about not fully evaluating the physics.

 

Also see my video link to matt j showing the VERY short time and distance of impact. And see my point earlier to mdg about providing some "proof" how a metal clubhead travelling at 100 mph will "deflect" instead of dig through SOFT ground.

 

And you also may want to wait until after I provide more details to Matt Js earlier post.

 

You're threw in SOFT ground there at the end. Please define what soft ground is.

 

I'm not an agronomist but have some general notions of turf and soil.

 

To a metal clubhead at 100 mph, 90% of golf turf is SOFT. You may want to compare the density of carbon steel to that of dirt.

 

Food for thought (until I get to matt js post): How much ground will get compacted before it will stop or deflect a metal clubhead traveling at 100 mph? Does is start deflecting immediately? Is it less than an inch? 1/4"? 1/32"? As an estimate, you could take a club and simply try to hammer the ground.

 

Then compare this to how "different" the bounce is between a high and low bounce club. This difference is MINISCULE compared to how much the turf compresses.

 

And then even sleep on this before responding.

 

Sleep? What's that?

 

BTW as you know, no club head is traveling 100mph directly at the ground.

It's always going to be an oblique impact.

 

Ever skip a stone over water?? Ever jump off a boat at 100mph??

[DeNinny]

It's kinda like George Foreman espousing how great his grill is...

 

 

...or Miura espousing how great their forgings are...

 

Teehee! :D

 

Yeah, I'm bein' a stinker! Call it 'The Butterscotch Effect'

 

 

TOOLED!

 

And it took my hands on experience hitting hundreds of balls between my mp67s and various Miuras before I even considered buying mine.

 

One thing I've NEVER done is used Miuras website or "papers" by them and claimed any of it was true.

 

Nor would I bring up points about bounce unless I have exhausted the complete physics AND have direct experience playing both high and low bounce 60* wedges.

 

The only thing stinking is whatever you just tried to imply.

[Palauan Hammer]

Rad, the LPGA ladies are teeing it up at the Senator Course this week, I'd love to watch but coverage is @230am local time here soooo. Also was lurking in the "hardest courses in the US" thread and the Judge course came up quite a bit. I'm definitely gonna have to come check you out someday and I'll play the tips just so I can try to break a 100 lol. Hopefully we see each other while playing the round too! :taunt:

 

Haha, that would be awesome! And keep mentioning it, lol, since I'm working

on getting MC down here this summer. I think he's dying to play gonna die plalying the Judge

from the tips. :D

 

Fixed that for you LOL! :)

 

And I'm trying my best to get my butt out there. It looks like my Aunts might sell the beautiful house I grew up in in Seattle. My Brother moved out, his GF is pregnant and they're probably gonna get hitched. SO, if I do move out stateside I'll probably go to Tucson. In all seriousness one of my goals is to play with all of you guys, either as a group or separate. You all have helped (and still are) helping me get through this crazy part of my life lol

[PeanutsDaddy]

I've always had better success with higher bounce wedges. Not sure why and honesty don't care.

 

Here's what I struggle to figure out, why are some golfers so friggin slow?

 

Not looking to start a slow play conversation, just baffled by the pace of some players. I played 2 1/2 holes (hitting two balls) in the time it took a twosome the time to play two shots each. Then read three pages of confessions while waiting on the next two tee boxes.

 

Soviet style torture . . . Science and slow play.

 

 

[Pigems]

Can't imagine too many people out there swinging anything but their Woods over 100mph....just to Nit Pick ;)

[Palauan Hammer]

PD, I've been behind some GRINDERS. You'd think they were playing a major of something, I don't get it either. A few guys I played with were pretty slow, but at least scored decent. I just don't watch lol. In the off island tournaments I've played it's much worse. I'm pretty decisive, visualize and hit it. Repeat. Good luck out there, mental toughness exercise!!

[DeNinny]

To a metal clubhead at 100 mph, 90% of golf turf is SOFT. You may want to compare the density of carbon steel to that of dirt.

 

Food for thought (until I get to matt js post): How much ground will get compacted before it will stop or deflect a metal clubhead traveling at 100 mph? Does is start deflecting immediately? Is it less than an inch? 1/4"? 1/32"? As an estimate, you could take a club and simply try to hammer the ground.

 

Then compare this to how "different" the bounce is between a high and low bounce club. This difference is MINISCULE compared to how much the turf compresses.

 

And then even sleep on this before responding.

 

Sleep? What's that?

 

BTW as you know, no club head is traveling 100mph directly at the ground.

It's always going to be an oblique impact.

 

Ever skip a stone over water?? Ever jump off a boat at 100mph??

 

Yes I already knew all this. It doesn't change my point. Go take some normal swings and measure that compaction with swings that bounce on the ground instead of taking a divot. Next time you play, I'm sure you will hit a few shots like this. Compare the depth of that compaction and still the differences you are arguing about high and low bounce are MINISCULE by comparison.

 

I'm only asking you to sleep or wait before responding because you don't fully comprehend what I'm explaining. You are fixated on debating the minutia. Plus I have already made every argument you are making to myself already.

 

Also you may want to read the book "Physics for Scientists and Engineers" by Douglas C. Giancoli before responding. I have the second edition and I have read it a couple of times. It will cover 90% of what I am explaining.

[Michael C.]

It's kinda like George Foreman espousing how great his grill is...

 

 

...or Miura espousing how great their forgings are...

 

Teehee! :D

 

Yeah, I'm bein' a stinker! Call it 'The Butterscotch Effect'

 

 

TOOLED!

 

And it took my hands on experience hitting hundreds of balls between my mp67s and various Miuras before I even considered buying mine.

 

One thing I've NEVER done is used Miuras website or "papers" by them and claimed any of it was true.

 

Nor would I bring up points about bounce unless I have exhausted the complete physics AND have direct experience playing both high and low bounce 60* wedges.

 

The only thing stinking is whatever you tried to just tried to imply.

 

Hundreds of balls?

 

NICE, my Bronerdian friend.

 

LMAO!! (hundreds of balls he says)

[MMB1500]

Guys, I'm looking at updating my wedges this year but am a bit lost. Do any of you know anything about wedge 'bounce' or what I should be looking for?