Jeff Mann versus Dan Carraher

[BatManOneTwo]

Fort Worth Pro,

 

You wrote the following in post #49 -: " If you think a player can begin extending the wrist before impact, magically stop extending from 7-7.2, and then begin extending again to 8 then I now understand why you can't play. That might be one of the dumbest ideas I have ever heard floated in a golf forum and that is saying something."

 

I agree with you that it would be an extremely dumb idea for a golfer to believe that he can start extending the left wrist before impact, then "magically" stop extending the left wrist from P7 => P7.2, and then start extending the left wrist again to P8 - considering the speed of hand/club motion during the late downswing and early followthrough.

 

However, why do you imply that Jeff Mann harbors that dumb opinion?

 

When Jeff Mann describes his drive-hold hand release action through impact between P7 and P7.2 in that NGI forum thread, he is stating that one should be holding an unchanged GFLW/intact alignment between P7 and P7.2. I suspect that you may not understand that Jeff Mann also believes that many skilled pro golfers maintain a GFLW/intact LAFW throughout the entire downswing between P4 and impact, and he doesn't believe that they are extending their left wrist pre-impact. So, when they continue to maintain a GFLW/intact LAFW between impact and P7.2, there is no significant change in the degree of left wrist extension happening during the clubhead's travel time through the immediate impact zone between P7 and P7.2.

 

Consider an example of a golfer who maintains an intact LAFW/GFLW throughout both the downswing time period and the early followthrough time period between P7 and P7.2.

 

Kelli Oride swing video -

 

Here are capture images from the video showing her late downswing and early followthrough between P5.5 and P7.2.

 

 

Note that Kelli Oride maintains a GFLW (unchanged degree of left wrist extension) throughout that entire P5.5 => P7.2 time period, and she is not extending her left wrist pre-impact. The diagram below the capture images depicts what an observer would note if he were viewing her swing from a birds-eye view perspective - note that her clubshaft remains straight-in-line (from an angular rotational perspective) with her left forearm, which means that she maintains an intact LAFW during that entire time period.

 

Now, let's consider what happens to her clubface between P7 and P7.2.

 

 

Image 1 shows Kelli Oride at impact, image 2 is at P7.05, image 3 is at P7.1 and image 4 is at P7.2.

 

Note that her clubface remains square to the clubhead arc (but obviously not the target) during the P7 => P7.2 time period. That's part of Jeff Mann's definition of a DH-hand release action. He is not asserting that the clubface doesn't roll between P7 and P7.2 - and he is only asserting that the amount of roll happening between P7 and P7.2 is the amount needed to keep the clubface square to the clubhead arc. If the clubface rolls more than that defined amount, then it would represent a non-DH hand release action.

 

Note that Kelli Oride's clubshaft does not bypass her left forearm (from an angular rotational perspective) between P7 and P7.2. That is a major definitional part of Jeff Mann's definition of a DH-hand release action. Jeff Mann has stated that it is not possible to prevent the clubshaft from bypassing the left arm between P7 and P7.2 if one adds a significant amount of left wrist extending action (which he has arbitrarily defined as being > 5 degrees of additional left wrist extension) during that time period. In fact, in that NGI forum thread, Jeff Mann has offered to pay Dan (or any other person) $100 if they can prove that it is possible to prevent the clubshaft from bypassing the left arm between P7 and P7.2 if one adds an additional 5+ degrees of left wrist extension during that time period. GolfWRX forum members (like you) are free to accept his challenge at any time in the future.

 

Mann...you are all over the map with your arguments. So much idiocy in one post. First. You can not see left wrist flexion extension at p6 in a 2d face on. Second. You say that the left wrist remains unchanged from 7 to 7.2, that the sample rate on an AMM can't account for the speed through impact and yet say the left wrist isn't extending prior to impact when the AMM clearly shows it is. Third, the left wrist is clearly changing flexion/extension through the entire downswing as shown by AMM. It is not "unchanged" and the sample rate is plenty fast enough to measure throughout the downswing. Try to come up with something a little more coherent before you get banned from here...again. See ya Jeffrey

 

ForthWorthPro - I fully respect your "right" to harbor a different opinion than me. Why do you not reciprocate my goodwill and allow me to express contrary opinions - without implying that I should be banned for harboring contrary opinions (simply because you deem them to be "incoherent")?

 

I agree with you that one cannot see left wrist flexion-extension at P6 in a face-on 2-D capture image. However, I can discern the clubshaft angle (relative to the left forearm) when I view the swing video in slow motion, and I believe that I can correctly deduce that the left wrist must be geometrically flat if the LAFW is intact. You are not obliged to agree with my expressed opinion - but surely you do not need to imply that I should be banned simply because I am expressing a different opinion than you.

 

You also stated-: "You say that the left wrist remains unchanged from 7 to 7.2, that the sample rate on an AMM can't account for the speed through impact and yet say the left wrist isn't extending prior to impact when the AMM clearly shows it is. Third, the left wrist is clearly changing flexion/extension through the entire downswing as shown by AMM. It is not "unchanged" and the sample rate is plenty fast enough to measure throughout the downswing".

 

Whose swing are you referring to when you write about the AMM system showing left wrist extension prior to impact? Surely, it cannot be Kelli Oride's swing - because you presumably do not have any 3-D graphs of her swing. Also, if there is any change in flexion-extension in the late downswing between P6 and impact, 3-D graphs usually show increasing flexion (and not extension) - as seen in the following 3-D graph produced by Phil Cheetham.

 

 

Note that the green graph demonstrates increasing flexion, and not extension, in the late downswing prior to impact.

 

You should be banned because you have been banned before and it is against forum rules to have two screen names. You have proven many times over that you cannot play nice with others.

 

I am not talking about that girls swing. I am talking about EVERY SWING EVER MEASURED IN 3D outside of one player. At p6 the angle of the shaft relative to the left forearm has nothing to do with flexion/extension and everything to do with ulnar/radial deviation. The sample rate argument does not hold water because we have enough data that shows the same thing in everyone. It's not like this is one swing. It's literally every swing.

You still have not shown to me how a wrist that is extending before impact can suddenly stop extending from p7-7.2 and then begin re-extending from 7.2-8. That is nonsensical and absolutely is what you are claiming happens.

 

Fort Worth Pro,

 

You stated-: "At p6 the angle of the shaft relative to the left forearm has nothing to do with flexion/extension and everything to do with ulnar/radial deviation".

 

I disagree 100% with your statement. The angle of the shaft in the plane of radial => ulnar deviation happens within the plane of an intact LAFW. I am referring to the plane of left wrist flexion-extension, which is perpendicular to the plane of an intact LAFW, and any significant left wrist extension would disrupt the intact LAFW alignment and I can see no evidence of a disrupted intact LAFW alignment in Kelli Oride's downswing.

 

You also wrote-: "You still have not shown to me how a wrist that is extending before impact can suddenly stop extending from p7-7.2 and then begin re-extending from 7.2-8. That is nonsensical and absolutely is what you are claiming happens."

 

I disagree with your unfounded assertion that I have ever claimed that "a left wrist that is extending before impact can suddenly stop extending from P7 => P7.2 and then begin re-extending from P7.2 => P8". I personally think that the phenomenon described in italics between the enclosing quotes is impossible!

 

By the way, in what way can I not "play nice with others"? Should I not be free to express a contrary opinion if I disagree with another forum member's expressed opinion. You strongly disagree with my opinions, and you should be freely allowed to disagree with my opinions. I would never think that you are "not playing nice" simply because you disagree with my opinions. Even if you strongly disagree with my expressed opinions, don't you think that it is healthy for a golf forum to allow forum members to OPENLY express a great variety of different opinions?

[Fort Worth Pro]

Dan,

 

You wrote-: "I'm not misrepresenting anything. You're holding the stills of Grant Wait as more accurate than 3D by saying that the video isn't matching the 3D data. So yes you're saying the video captured is more accurate than the 3D data even though it's not captured at a faster speed when you use the stills as evidence. You can't claim the 3D data is too slow and then use grainy stills from video that's not shot at a faster speed as evidence. It's not only illogical but the definition of hypocrisy".

 

When did I ever state that those Grant Waite still images are more accurate than the accompanying 3-D data? I personally think that they are both inaccurate because of slow capture rates of ~240-250Hz. I have only stated that high quality still images taken at camera frame rates of 2,000 - 100,000 frames/second are much more accurate at assessing the motion of the left wrist during the P7 => P7.2 time period - compared to 3D capture rates at 250-400 Hz. You are misrepresenting me as per your usual tendency, and then you still have the audacity to call me a "hypocrite". Note that I never indulge in ad hominem insults and I only label your opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics as being "wrongheaded" or "incorrect" when I disagree with your opinions. Although I have strongly disagreed with your personal opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics, I have never attacked you (or any other forum member) with any ad hominem insults, and I primarily focus my posts on expressing counterarguments related to a number of topics re: golf swing biomechanics. When I express a counterargument, I am not forcing any forum member to believe my opinions, and I fully expect them to use their independent judgment to agree, or disagree, with my expressed opinions. That's what an OPEN golf forum should foster - it should allow any forum member to express their personal opinion without fear of being ridiculed in an uncivilized manner (as evidenced by many posts in this thread that have been directed at me). Although I have being grossly ridiculed by many posters in this thread, I have never responded in kind, and I only focus my posts on discussion/debate points re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics.

 

But you have been banned, and are in violation of forum rules. You are no longer entitled to post in this open forum.

 

Why? Because he is legit? Smart? Not a salesman like Iteach?

 

Except he isn't legit or smart. He is wrong and STILL in violation of forum rules. He has been banned before. The guy got tired of talking to himself on his own "forum" and decided to come share his incoherent ramblings with the world. If your feud with DC leads you take this guys side you need to reevaluate things.

[bph7]

Fort Worth Pro,

 

You wrote the following in post #49 -: " If you think a player can begin extending the wrist before impact, magically stop extending from 7-7.2, and then begin extending again to 8 then I now understand why you can't play. That might be one of the dumbest ideas I have ever heard floated in a golf forum and that is saying something."

 

I agree with you that it would be an extremely dumb idea for a golfer to believe that he can start extending the left wrist before impact, then "magically" stop extending the left wrist from P7 => P7.2, and then start extending the left wrist again to P8 - considering the speed of hand/club motion during the late downswing and early followthrough.

 

However, why do you imply that Jeff Mann harbors that dumb opinion?

 

When Jeff Mann describes his drive-hold hand release action through impact between P7 and P7.2 in that NGI forum thread, he is stating that one should be holding an unchanged GFLW/intact alignment between P7 and P7.2. I suspect that you may not understand that Jeff Mann also believes that many skilled pro golfers maintain a GFLW/intact LAFW throughout the entire downswing between P4 and impact, and he doesn't believe that they are extending their left wrist pre-impact. So, when they continue to maintain a GFLW/intact LAFW between impact and P7.2, there is no significant change in the degree of left wrist extension happening during the clubhead's travel time through the immediate impact zone between P7 and P7.2.

 

Consider an example of a golfer who maintains an intact LAFW/GFLW throughout both the downswing time period and the early followthrough time period between P7 and P7.2.

 

Kelli Oride swing video -

 

Here are capture images from the video showing her late downswing and early followthrough between P5.5 and P7.2.

 

 

Note that Kelli Oride maintains a GFLW (unchanged degree of left wrist extension) throughout that entire P5.5 => P7.2 time period, and she is not extending her left wrist pre-impact. The diagram below the capture images depicts what an observer would note if he were viewing her swing from a birds-eye view perspective - note that her clubshaft remains straight-in-line (from an angular rotational perspective) with her left forearm, which means that she maintains an intact LAFW during that entire time period.

 

Now, let's consider what happens to her clubface between P7 and P7.2.

 

 

Image 1 shows Kelli Oride at impact, image 2 is at P7.05, image 3 is at P7.1 and image 4 is at P7.2.

 

Note that her clubface remains square to the clubhead arc (but obviously not the target) during the P7 => P7.2 time period. That's part of Jeff Mann's definition of a DH-hand release action. He is not asserting that the clubface doesn't roll between P7 and P7.2 - and he is only asserting that the amount of roll happening between P7 and P7.2 is the amount needed to keep the clubface square to the clubhead arc. If the clubface rolls more than that defined amount, then it would represent a non-DH hand release action.

 

Note that Kelli Oride's clubshaft does not bypass her left forearm (from an angular rotational perspective) between P7 and P7.2. That is a major definitional part of Jeff Mann's definition of a DH-hand release action. Jeff Mann has stated that it is not possible to prevent the clubshaft from bypassing the left arm between P7 and P7.2 if one adds a significant amount of left wrist extending action (which he has arbitrarily defined as being > 5 degrees of additional left wrist extension) during that time period. In fact, in that NGI forum thread, Jeff Mann has offered to pay Dan (or any other person) $100 if they can prove that it is possible to prevent the clubshaft from bypassing the left arm between P7 and P7.2 if one adds an additional 5+ degrees of left wrist extension during that time period. GolfWRX forum members (like you) are free to accept his challenge at any time in the future.

 

Mann...you are all over the map with your arguments. So much idiocy in one post. First. You can not see left wrist flexion extension at p6 in a 2d face on. Second. You say that the left wrist remains unchanged from 7 to 7.2, that the sample rate on an AMM can't account for the speed through impact and yet say the left wrist isn't extending prior to impact when the AMM clearly shows it is. Third, the left wrist is clearly changing flexion/extension through the entire downswing as shown by AMM. It is not "unchanged" and the sample rate is plenty fast enough to measure throughout the downswing. Try to come up with something a little more coherent before you get banned from here...again. See ya Jeffrey

 

ForthWorthPro - I fully respect your "right" to harbor a different opinion than me. Why do you not reciprocate my goodwill and allow me to express contrary opinions - without implying that I should be banned for harboring contrary opinions (simply because you deem them to be "incoherent")?

 

I agree with you that one cannot see left wrist flexion-extension at P6 in a face-on 2-D capture image. However, I can discern the clubshaft angle (relative to the left forearm) when I view the swing video in slow motion, and I believe that I can correctly deduce that the left wrist must be geometrically flat if the LAFW is intact. You are not obliged to agree with my expressed opinion - but surely you do not need to imply that I should be banned simply because I am expressing a different opinion than you.

 

You also stated-: "You say that the left wrist remains unchanged from 7 to 7.2, that the sample rate on an AMM can't account for the speed through impact and yet say the left wrist isn't extending prior to impact when the AMM clearly shows it is. Third, the left wrist is clearly changing flexion/extension through the entire downswing as shown by AMM. It is not "unchanged" and the sample rate is plenty fast enough to measure throughout the downswing".

 

Whose swing are you referring to when you write about the AMM system showing left wrist extension prior to impact? Surely, it cannot be Kelli Oride's swing - because you presumably do not have any 3-D graphs of her swing. Also, if there is any change in flexion-extension in the late downswing between P6 and impact, 3-D graphs usually show increasing flexion (and not extension) - as seen in the following 3-D graph produced by Phil Cheetham.

 

 

Note that the green graph demonstrates increasing flexion, and not extension, in the late downswing prior to impact.

 

You should be banned because you have been banned before and it is against forum rules to have two screen names. You have proven many times over that you cannot play nice with others.

 

I am not talking about that girls swing. I am talking about EVERY SWING EVER MEASURED IN 3D outside of one player. At p6 the angle of the shaft relative to the left forearm has nothing to do with flexion/extension and everything to do with ulnar/radial deviation. The sample rate argument does not hold water because we have enough data that shows the same thing in everyone. It's not like this is one swing. It's literally every swing.

You still have not shown to me how a wrist that is extending before impact can suddenly stop extending from p7-7.2 and then begin re-extending from 7.2-8. That is nonsensical and absolutely is what you are claiming happens.

 

Fort Worth Pro,

 

You stated-: "At p6 the angle of the shaft relative to the left forearm has nothing to do with flexion/extension and everything to do with ulnar/radial deviation".

 

I disagree 100% with your statement. The angle of the shaft in the plane of radial => ulnar deviation happens within the plane of an intact LAFW. I am referring to the plane of left wrist flexion-extension, which is perpendicular to the plane of an intact LAFW, and any significant left wrist extension would disrupt the intact LAFW alignment and I can see no evidence of a disrupted intact LAFW alignment in Kelli Oride's downswing.

 

You also wrote-: "You still have not shown to me how a wrist that is extending before impact can suddenly stop extending from p7-7.2 and then begin re-extending from 7.2-8. That is nonsensical and absolutely is what you are claiming happens."

 

I disagree with your unfounded assertion that I have ever claimed that "a left wrist that is extending before impact can suddenly stop extending from P7 => P7.2 and then begin re-extending from P7.2 => P8". I personally think that the phenomenon described in italics between the enclosing quotes is impossible!

 

By the way, in what way can I not "play nice with others"? Should I not be free to express a contrary opinion if I disagree with another forum member's expressed opinion. You strongly disagree with my opinions, and you should be freely allowed to disagree with my opinions. I would never think that you are "not playing nice" simply because you disagree with my opinions. Even if you strongly disagree with my expressed opinions, don't you think that it is healthy for a golf forum to allow forum members to OPENLY express a great variety of different opinions?

You can't claim any high ground with the rules when you are violating one yourself. On the merits, the current state of the art data proves you profoundly wrong. You have no interest in open discussion, if you did you'd listen to actual teachers who have access to better data/measurements than you and actually know what is going on.

[bph7]

Dan,

 

You wrote-: "I'm not misrepresenting anything. You're holding the stills of Grant Wait as more accurate than 3D by saying that the video isn't matching the 3D data. So yes you're saying the video captured is more accurate than the 3D data even though it's not captured at a faster speed when you use the stills as evidence. You can't claim the 3D data is too slow and then use grainy stills from video that's not shot at a faster speed as evidence. It's not only illogical but the definition of hypocrisy".

 

When did I ever state that those Grant Waite still images are more accurate than the accompanying 3-D data? I personally think that they are both inaccurate because of slow capture rates of ~240-250Hz. I have only stated that high quality still images taken at camera frame rates of 2,000 - 100,000 frames/second are much more accurate at assessing the motion of the left wrist during the P7 => P7.2 time period - compared to 3D capture rates at 250-400 Hz. You are misrepresenting me as per your usual tendency, and then you still have the audacity to call me a "hypocrite". Note that I never indulge in ad hominem insults and I only label your opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics as being "wrongheaded" or "incorrect" when I disagree with your opinions. Although I have strongly disagreed with your personal opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics, I have never attacked you (or any other forum member) with any ad hominem insults, and I primarily focus my posts on expressing counterarguments related to a number of topics re: golf swing biomechanics. When I express a counterargument, I am not forcing any forum member to believe my opinions, and I fully expect them to use their independent judgment to agree, or disagree, with my expressed opinions. That's what an OPEN golf forum should foster - it should allow any forum member to express their personal opinion without fear of being ridiculed in an uncivilized manner (as evidenced by many posts in this thread that have been directed at me). Although I have being grossly ridiculed by many posters in this thread, I have never responded in kind, and I only focus my posts on discussion/debate points re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics.

 

But you have been banned, and are in violation of forum rules. You are no longer entitled to post in this open forum.

 

Why? Because he is legit? Smart? Not a salesman like Iteach?

 

No beacuse he's in violation of forum rules. He is wrong in fact, I've seen the graphs, it's indisputable (with the exception of Daniel Berger). His only avenue of argument would be to dispute the data, but he can't seriously do that since he hasn't seen it.

[thekru]

Dan,

 

You wrote-: "I'm not misrepresenting anything. You're holding the stills of Grant Wait as more accurate than 3D by saying that the video isn't matching the 3D data. So yes you're saying the video captured is more accurate than the 3D data even though it's not captured at a faster speed when you use the stills as evidence. You can't claim the 3D data is too slow and then use grainy stills from video that's not shot at a faster speed as evidence. It's not only illogical but the definition of hypocrisy".

 

When did I ever state that those Grant Waite still images are more accurate than the accompanying 3-D data? I personally think that they are both inaccurate because of slow capture rates of ~240-250Hz. I have only stated that high quality still images taken at camera frame rates of 2,000 - 100,000 frames/second are much more accurate at assessing the motion of the left wrist during the P7 => P7.2 time period - compared to 3D capture rates at 250-400 Hz. You are misrepresenting me as per your usual tendency, and then you still have the audacity to call me a "hypocrite". Note that I never indulge in ad hominem insults and I only label your opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics as being "wrongheaded" or "incorrect" when I disagree with your opinions. Although I have strongly disagreed with your personal opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics, I have never attacked you (or any other forum member) with any ad hominem insults, and I primarily focus my posts on expressing counterarguments related to a number of topics re: golf swing biomechanics. When I express a counterargument, I am not forcing any forum member to believe my opinions, and I fully expect them to use their independent judgment to agree, or disagree, with my expressed opinions. That's what an OPEN golf forum should foster - it should allow any forum member to express their personal opinion without fear of being ridiculed in an uncivilized manner (as evidenced by many posts in this thread that have been directed at me). Although I have being grossly ridiculed by many posters in this thread, I have never responded in kind, and I only focus my posts on discussion/debate points re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics.

 

But you have been banned, and are in violation of forum rules. You are no longer entitled to post in this open forum.

 

Why? Because he is legit? Smart? Not a salesman like Iteach?

 

Except he isn't legit or smart. He is wrong and STILL in violation of forum rules. He has been banned before. The guy got tired of talking to himself on his own "forum" and decided to come share his incoherent ramblings with the world. If your feud with DC leads you take this guys side you need to reevaluate things.

 

Whatever... maybe because you guys are threatened you are now begging for him to be banned. All your '3-D' BS not looking so good. Lot of money to spend on that stuff now you have to pay for it. Sell, sell, sell...

[bph7]

Dan,

 

You wrote-: "I'm not misrepresenting anything. You're holding the stills of Grant Wait as more accurate than 3D by saying that the video isn't matching the 3D data. So yes you're saying the video captured is more accurate than the 3D data even though it's not captured at a faster speed when you use the stills as evidence. You can't claim the 3D data is too slow and then use grainy stills from video that's not shot at a faster speed as evidence. It's not only illogical but the definition of hypocrisy".

 

When did I ever state that those Grant Waite still images are more accurate than the accompanying 3-D data? I personally think that they are both inaccurate because of slow capture rates of ~240-250Hz. I have only stated that high quality still images taken at camera frame rates of 2,000 - 100,000 frames/second are much more accurate at assessing the motion of the left wrist during the P7 => P7.2 time period - compared to 3D capture rates at 250-400 Hz. You are misrepresenting me as per your usual tendency, and then you still have the audacity to call me a "hypocrite". Note that I never indulge in ad hominem insults and I only label your opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics as being "wrongheaded" or "incorrect" when I disagree with your opinions. Although I have strongly disagreed with your personal opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics, I have never attacked you (or any other forum member) with any ad hominem insults, and I primarily focus my posts on expressing counterarguments related to a number of topics re: golf swing biomechanics. When I express a counterargument, I am not forcing any forum member to believe my opinions, and I fully expect them to use their independent judgment to agree, or disagree, with my expressed opinions. That's what an OPEN golf forum should foster - it should allow any forum member to express their personal opinion without fear of being ridiculed in an uncivilized manner (as evidenced by many posts in this thread that have been directed at me). Although I have being grossly ridiculed by many posters in this thread, I have never responded in kind, and I only focus my posts on discussion/debate points re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics.

 

But you have been banned, and are in violation of forum rules. You are no longer entitled to post in this open forum.

 

Why? Because he is legit? Smart? Not a salesman like Iteach?

 

Except he isn't legit or smart. He is wrong and STILL in violation of forum rules. He has been banned before. The guy got tired of talking to himself on his own "forum" and decided to come share his incoherent ramblings with the world. If your feud with DC leads you take this guys side you need to reevaluate things.

 

Whatever... maybe because you guys are threatened you are now begging for him to be banned. All your '3-D' BS not looking so good. Lot of money to spend on that stuff now you have to pay for it. Sell, sell, sell...

 

How would instructors be threatened? Mann has never given lessons, I doubt he's hurting their bottom line. It's the most advanced technology currently available, if you want to dispute it, the burden is on you to get access to the system and show the flaws in the methodology. Why would like every PGA tour player be measured if it was just bogus? Wouldn't that be a collosal waste of time when they could just go to Jeff Mann?

[Fort Worth Pro]

Fort Worth Pro,

 

You wrote the following in post #49 -: " If you think a player can begin extending the wrist before impact, magically stop extending from 7-7.2, and then begin extending again to 8 then I now understand why you can't play. That might be one of the dumbest ideas I have ever heard floated in a golf forum and that is saying something."

 

I agree with you that it would be an extremely dumb idea for a golfer to believe that he can start extending the left wrist before impact, then "magically" stop extending the left wrist from P7 => P7.2, and then start extending the left wrist again to P8 - considering the speed of hand/club motion during the late downswing and early followthrough.

 

However, why do you imply that Jeff Mann harbors that dumb opinion?

 

When Jeff Mann describes his drive-hold hand release action through impact between P7 and P7.2 in that NGI forum thread, he is stating that one should be holding an unchanged GFLW/intact alignment between P7 and P7.2. I suspect that you may not understand that Jeff Mann also believes that many skilled pro golfers maintain a GFLW/intact LAFW throughout the entire downswing between P4 and impact, and he doesn't believe that they are extending their left wrist pre-impact. So, when they continue to maintain a GFLW/intact LAFW between impact and P7.2, there is no significant change in the degree of left wrist extension happening during the clubhead's travel time through the immediate impact zone between P7 and P7.2.

 

Consider an example of a golfer who maintains an intact LAFW/GFLW throughout both the downswing time period and the early followthrough time period between P7 and P7.2.

 

Kelli Oride swing video -

 

Here are capture images from the video showing her late downswing and early followthrough between P5.5 and P7.2.

 

 

Note that Kelli Oride maintains a GFLW (unchanged degree of left wrist extension) throughout that entire P5.5 => P7.2 time period, and she is not extending her left wrist pre-impact. The diagram below the capture images depicts what an observer would note if he were viewing her swing from a birds-eye view perspective - note that her clubshaft remains straight-in-line (from an angular rotational perspective) with her left forearm, which means that she maintains an intact LAFW during that entire time period.

 

Now, let's consider what happens to her clubface between P7 and P7.2.

 

 

Image 1 shows Kelli Oride at impact, image 2 is at P7.05, image 3 is at P7.1 and image 4 is at P7.2.

 

Note that her clubface remains square to the clubhead arc (but obviously not the target) during the P7 => P7.2 time period. That's part of Jeff Mann's definition of a DH-hand release action. He is not asserting that the clubface doesn't roll between P7 and P7.2 - and he is only asserting that the amount of roll happening between P7 and P7.2 is the amount needed to keep the clubface square to the clubhead arc. If the clubface rolls more than that defined amount, then it would represent a non-DH hand release action.

 

Note that Kelli Oride's clubshaft does not bypass her left forearm (from an angular rotational perspective) between P7 and P7.2. That is a major definitional part of Jeff Mann's definition of a DH-hand release action. Jeff Mann has stated that it is not possible to prevent the clubshaft from bypassing the left arm between P7 and P7.2 if one adds a significant amount of left wrist extending action (which he has arbitrarily defined as being > 5 degrees of additional left wrist extension) during that time period. In fact, in that NGI forum thread, Jeff Mann has offered to pay Dan (or any other person) $100 if they can prove that it is possible to prevent the clubshaft from bypassing the left arm between P7 and P7.2 if one adds an additional 5+ degrees of left wrist extension during that time period. GolfWRX forum members (like you) are free to accept his challenge at any time in the future.

 

Mann...you are all over the map with your arguments. So much idiocy in one post. First. You can not see left wrist flexion extension at p6 in a 2d face on. Second. You say that the left wrist remains unchanged from 7 to 7.2, that the sample rate on an AMM can't account for the speed through impact and yet say the left wrist isn't extending prior to impact when the AMM clearly shows it is. Third, the left wrist is clearly changing flexion/extension through the entire downswing as shown by AMM. It is not "unchanged" and the sample rate is plenty fast enough to measure throughout the downswing. Try to come up with something a little more coherent before you get banned from here...again. See ya Jeffrey

 

ForthWorthPro - I fully respect your "right" to harbor a different opinion than me. Why do you not reciprocate my goodwill and allow me to express contrary opinions - without implying that I should be banned for harboring contrary opinions (simply because you deem them to be "incoherent")?

 

I agree with you that one cannot see left wrist flexion-extension at P6 in a face-on 2-D capture image. However, I can discern the clubshaft angle (relative to the left forearm) when I view the swing video in slow motion, and I believe that I can correctly deduce that the left wrist must be geometrically flat if the LAFW is intact. You are not obliged to agree with my expressed opinion - but surely you do not need to imply that I should be banned simply because I am expressing a different opinion than you.

 

You also stated-: "You say that the left wrist remains unchanged from 7 to 7.2, that the sample rate on an AMM can't account for the speed through impact and yet say the left wrist isn't extending prior to impact when the AMM clearly shows it is. Third, the left wrist is clearly changing flexion/extension through the entire downswing as shown by AMM. It is not "unchanged" and the sample rate is plenty fast enough to measure throughout the downswing".

 

Whose swing are you referring to when you write about the AMM system showing left wrist extension prior to impact? Surely, it cannot be Kelli Oride's swing - because you presumably do not have any 3-D graphs of her swing. Also, if there is any change in flexion-extension in the late downswing between P6 and impact, 3-D graphs usually show increasing flexion (and not extension) - as seen in the following 3-D graph produced by Phil Cheetham.

 

 

Note that the green graph demonstrates increasing flexion, and not extension, in the late downswing prior to impact.

 

You should be banned because you have been banned before and it is against forum rules to have two screen names. You have proven many times over that you cannot play nice with others.

 

I am not talking about that girls swing. I am talking about EVERY SWING EVER MEASURED IN 3D outside of one player. At p6 the angle of the shaft relative to the left forearm has nothing to do with flexion/extension and everything to do with ulnar/radial deviation. The sample rate argument does not hold water because we have enough data that shows the same thing in everyone. It's not like this is one swing. It's literally every swing.

You still have not shown to me how a wrist that is extending before impact can suddenly stop extending from p7-7.2 and then begin re-extending from 7.2-8. That is nonsensical and absolutely is what you are claiming happens.

 

Fort Worth Pro,

 

You stated-: "At p6 the angle of the shaft relative to the left forearm has nothing to do with flexion/extension and everything to do with ulnar/radial deviation".

 

I disagree 100% with your statement. The angle of the shaft in the plane of radial => ulnar deviation happens within the plane of an intact LAFW. I am referring to the plane of left wrist flexion-extension, which is perpendicular to the plane of an intact LAFW, and any significant left wrist extension would disrupt the intact LAFW alignment and I can see no evidence of a disrupted intact LAFW alignment in Kelli Oride's downswing.

 

You also wrote-: "You still have not shown to me how a wrist that is extending before impact can suddenly stop extending from p7-7.2 and then begin re-extending from 7.2-8. That is nonsensical and absolutely is what you are claiming happens."

 

I disagree with your unfounded assertion that I have ever claimed that "a left wrist that is extending before impact can suddenly stop extending from P7 => P7.2 and then begin re-extending from P7.2 => P8". I personally think that the phenomenon described in italics between the enclosing quotes is impossible!

 

By the way, in what way can I not "play nice with others"? Should I not be free to express a contrary opinion if I disagree with another forum member's expressed opinion. You strongly disagree with my opinions, and you should be freely allowed to disagree with my opinions. I would never think that you are "not playing nice" simply because you disagree with my opinions. Even if you strongly disagree with my expressed opinions, don't you think that it is healthy for a golf forum to allow forum members to OPENLY express a great variety of different opinions?

 

You can disagree all you want but that would just be you choosing to be wrong. At p6 the angle between the club and left forearm is almost 100% dictated by ulnar/radial deviation.

 

Do you agree that the lead wrist begins extending prior to impact?

 

You have been banned from every golf forum you have ever posted on. Unless you changed your meds then you have shown that you are incapable of playing nice with others.

[Ghost of Snead]

Dan,

 

You wrote-: "I'm not misrepresenting anything. You're holding the stills of Grant Wait as more accurate than 3D by saying that the video isn't matching the 3D data. So yes you're saying the video captured is more accurate than the 3D data even though it's not captured at a faster speed when you use the stills as evidence. You can't claim the 3D data is too slow and then use grainy stills from video that's not shot at a faster speed as evidence. It's not only illogical but the definition of hypocrisy".

 

When did I ever state that those Grant Waite still images are more accurate than the accompanying 3-D data? I personally think that they are both inaccurate because of slow capture rates of ~240-250Hz. I have only stated that high quality still images taken at camera frame rates of 2,000 - 100,000 frames/second are much more accurate at assessing the motion of the left wrist during the P7 => P7.2 time period - compared to 3D capture rates at 250-400 Hz. You are misrepresenting me as per your usual tendency, and then you still have the audacity to call me a "hypocrite". Note that I never indulge in ad hominem insults and I only label your opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics as being "wrongheaded" or "incorrect" when I disagree with your opinions. Although I have strongly disagreed with your personal opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics, I have never attacked you (or any other forum member) with any ad hominem insults, and I primarily focus my posts on expressing counterarguments related to a number of topics re: golf swing biomechanics. When I express a counterargument, I am not forcing any forum member to believe my opinions, and I fully expect them to use their independent judgment to agree, or disagree, with my expressed opinions. That's what an OPEN golf forum should foster - it should allow any forum member to express their personal opinion without fear of being ridiculed in an uncivilized manner (as evidenced by many posts in this thread that have been directed at me). Although I have being grossly ridiculed by many posters in this thread, I have never responded in kind, and I only focus my posts on discussion/debate points re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics.

 

But you have been banned, and are in violation of forum rules. You are no longer entitled to post in this open forum.

 

Why? Because he is legit? Smart? Not a salesman like Iteach?

 

What did Iteach sell you ? A guarantee you would be a +4 in a month if you practiced what he told you to work on ?

[Fort Worth Pro]

Dan,

 

You wrote-: "I'm not misrepresenting anything. You're holding the stills of Grant Wait as more accurate than 3D by saying that the video isn't matching the 3D data. So yes you're saying the video captured is more accurate than the 3D data even though it's not captured at a faster speed when you use the stills as evidence. You can't claim the 3D data is too slow and then use grainy stills from video that's not shot at a faster speed as evidence. It's not only illogical but the definition of hypocrisy".

 

When did I ever state that those Grant Waite still images are more accurate than the accompanying 3-D data? I personally think that they are both inaccurate because of slow capture rates of ~240-250Hz. I have only stated that high quality still images taken at camera frame rates of 2,000 - 100,000 frames/second are much more accurate at assessing the motion of the left wrist during the P7 => P7.2 time period - compared to 3D capture rates at 250-400 Hz. You are misrepresenting me as per your usual tendency, and then you still have the audacity to call me a "hypocrite". Note that I never indulge in ad hominem insults and I only label your opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics as being "wrongheaded" or "incorrect" when I disagree with your opinions. Although I have strongly disagreed with your personal opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics, I have never attacked you (or any other forum member) with any ad hominem insults, and I primarily focus my posts on expressing counterarguments related to a number of topics re: golf swing biomechanics. When I express a counterargument, I am not forcing any forum member to believe my opinions, and I fully expect them to use their independent judgment to agree, or disagree, with my expressed opinions. That's what an OPEN golf forum should foster - it should allow any forum member to express their personal opinion without fear of being ridiculed in an uncivilized manner (as evidenced by many posts in this thread that have been directed at me). Although I have being grossly ridiculed by many posters in this thread, I have never responded in kind, and I only focus my posts on discussion/debate points re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics.

 

But you have been banned, and are in violation of forum rules. You are no longer entitled to post in this open forum.

 

Why? Because he is legit? Smart? Not a salesman like Iteach?

 

Except he isn't legit or smart. He is wrong and STILL in violation of forum rules. He has been banned before. The guy got tired of talking to himself on his own "forum" and decided to come share his incoherent ramblings with the world. If your feud with DC leads you take this guys side you need to reevaluate things.

 

Whatever... maybe because you guys are threatened you are now begging for him to be banned. All your '3-D' BS not looking so good. Lot of money to spend on that stuff now you have to pay for it. Sell, sell, sell...

 

If you think we are wrong here that says more about you than it does us. I am not in the least bit threatened here.

[BatManOneTwo]

bph7,

 

You wrote-: "On the merits, the current state of the art data proves you profoundly wrong."

 

That's an opinion, and not a proven fact, and you are entitled to harbor that personal opinion.

 

You also wrote-: "You have no interest in open discussion, if you did you'd listen to actual teachers who have access to better data/measurements than you and actually know what is going on."

 

I disagree with your assertion - because I am very interested in open discussion and I very carefully and very thoughtfully evaluate the posts of actual teachers (like Dan Carraher). However, I disagree with your claim that they "actually know what is going on". Is my personal disagreement unacceptable in a golf forum that is devoted to an open discussion of topics related to golf swing biomechanics/mechanics?

[DavePelz4]

Just throw the manhood out there. Let's see who hits it longer and award a prize.

[Forged4ever]

Dan,

 

You wrote-: "I'm not misrepresenting anything. You're holding the stills of Grant Wait as more accurate than 3D by saying that the video isn't matching the 3D data. So yes you're saying the video captured is more accurate than the 3D data even though it's not captured at a faster speed when you use the stills as evidence. You can't claim the 3D data is too slow and then use grainy stills from video that's not shot at a faster speed as evidence. It's not only illogical but the definition of hypocrisy".

 

When did I ever state that those Grant Waite still images are more accurate than the accompanying 3-D data? I personally think that they are both inaccurate because of slow capture rates of ~240-250Hz. I have only stated that high quality still images taken at camera frame rates of 2,000 - 100,000 frames/second are much more accurate at assessing the motion of the left wrist during the P7 => P7.2 time period - compared to 3D capture rates at 250-400 Hz. You are misrepresenting me as per your usual tendency, and then you still have the audacity to call me a "hypocrite". Note that I never indulge in ad hominem insults and I only label your opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics as being "wrongheaded" or "incorrect" when I disagree with your opinions. Although I have strongly disagreed with your personal opinions re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics, I have never attacked you (or any other forum member) with any ad hominem insults, and I primarily focus my posts on expressing counterarguments related to a number of topics re: golf swing biomechanics. When I express a counterargument, I am not forcing any forum member to believe my opinions, and I fully expect them to use their independent judgment to agree, or disagree, with my expressed opinion. That's what an OPEN golf forum should foster - it should allow any forum member to express their personal opinion without fear of being ridiculed in an uncivilized manner (as evidenced by many posts in this thread that have been directed at me). Although I have being grossly ridiculed by many posters in this thread, I have never responded in kind, and I only focus my posts on discussion/debate points re: golf swing biomechanics/mechanics.

#1, you are not being "grossly ridiculed by many posters in this thread," you are being ridiculed by me. The reason is simple really....

 

You are shilling for someone who could not function on this board with the restraint and decorum that you have shown in this thread. You post an inflammatory title with a link to some bulls*** piece of garbage post by a guy consumed with getting into a pissing contest with Dan.

 

#2, what is in this thread will be of absolutely no use to the vast vast vast majority of these guys and its just you holding chucklehead's pecker while he has a defacto pissing contest in absentia, if indeed you are not he.

 

I am not one of Dan's bois as I got to +2.8 using my divot, ball flight and where my ball landed to measure, fix and improve my game, though I am close to one who I respect greatly as a Player but more importantly as a Man and he holds him in high esteem and that is good enough for me.

 

#3, I have perused some of your boi's stuff and while I currently am not in the game, I was, I was better than average and I was fortunate to have been exposed to some world class Teachers and Pros, not the least of one who was my Teacher for 32+ years and your boi is way off track.

 

#4, if you've read any of my stuff, then you know I got this thing about guys who haven't "been there done it," and who's tone of certainty far exceeds their actual knowledge just slinging overly technical esoteric bulls*** around. If you have not read my stuff, or as is more likely considering your personality, you would not admit it if you did, that's ok, because I just summarized my thoughts and views.

 

Whether or not one cares for Dan either personally or professionally, he has "been there done it," and has conducted himself in a manner that he is still here while your boi is not.

 

Why he even responded to you and this garbage is beyond me however I can understand when someone with a fake UN and non-existent avatar hiding behind a screen and keyboard questions him professionally, well that is hard to ignore.

 

This thread benefits absolutely no-one but you.

 

Not a single member reading this could improve their swing/game based on anything you've posted.

 

You can't take this to the PM or email?

 

You've got to post this garbage and make this public when it does not benefit a single member???

 

Then you speak of taking the high road, LMAO?

 

Okey dokey then

 

This has no place on this board.

 

It's between Dan and your boi

 

Regards,

RP

[Silky]

This is a battle over fundamentals. Is maintaining a flat left wrist a fundamental? Is maintaining swing plane a fundamental? Is the LAFW a fundamental?

I have been confined in the well of those fundamentals before, treating myself as a machine, fixated to those fake fundamentals, with little success.

 

A human being, although also a machine, should not be subjected to the same fundamentals as a robot like the Iron Byron. Advocating those fake fundamentals like maintaining a flat left wrist to a human golf swing maybe harmful than useful.

 

Certainly, physics and especially mechanics are fundamental.

In searching for my own perfect swing ;), now I believe that basic human motions like hammering/axing, spearing, throwing are fundamentals that we can deploy in building our golf swings and move away from those fake fundamentals. You can avoid OTT, casting, flipping, etc with these basic instinctive human motions.

[BatManOneTwo]

Fort Worth Pro,

 

You wrote-: "You can disagree all you want but that would just be you choosing to be wrong. At p6 the angle between the club and left forearm is almost 100% dictated by ulnar/radial deviation."

 

I agree with you that the angle between the club and the left forearm is almost 100% dictated by radial/ulnar deviation, which happens within the plane of an intact LAFW if the golfer uses the intact LAFW/GFLW technique. However, if the intact LAFW is disrupted by a significant amount of left wrist extension, then another angle is established between the left forearm and the clubshaft in the plane of left wrist extension/flexion.

 

You also asked-: "Do you agree that the lead wrist begins extending prior to impact?"

 

I agree that the left wrist begins to extend pre-impact between P6 => P7 in golfers who use the swing technique of "combined left wrist palmar flexion + early left wrist supination" (like Gary Woodland) or who use the swing technique of dynamic left wrist palmar flexion (like Jordan Spieth), but I do not agree that the left wrist extends between P6 and P7 in golfers who use the intact LAFW/GFLW technique (like Henrik Stenson).

[Fort Worth Pro]

Fort Worth Pro,

 

You wrote-: "You can disagree all you want but that would just be you choosing to be wrong. At p6 the angle between the club and left forearm is almost 100% dictated by ulnar/radial deviation."

 

I agree with you that the angle between the club and the left forearm is almost 100% dictated by radial/ulnar deviation, which happens within the plane of an intact LAFW if the golfer uses the intact LAFW/GFLW technique. However, if the intact LAFW is disrupted by a significant amount of left wrist extension, then another angle is established between the left forearm and the clubshaft in the plane of left wrist extension/flexion.

 

You also asked-: "Do you agree that the lead wrist begins extending prior to impact?"

 

I agree that the left wrist begins to extend pre-impact between P6 => P7 in golfers who use the swing technique of "combined left wrist palmar flexion + early left wrist supination" (like Gary Woodland) or who use the swing technique of dynamic left wrist palmar flexion (like Jordan Spieth), but I do not agree that the left wrist extends between P6 and P7 in golfers who use the intact LAFW/GFLW technique (like Henrik Stenson).

 

You should bring you girl kelly to our place and have her measured. Don't know if I have a tendon data at work. Care to share a list of players that fit your desired model and I will see if I can find the measured data on one or two?

[bph7]

bph7,

 

You wrote-: "On the merits, the current state of the art data proves you profoundly wrong."

 

That's an opinion, and not a proven fact, and you are entitled to harbor that personal opinion.

 

You also wrote-: "You have no interest in open discussion, if you did you'd listen to actual teachers who have access to better data/measurements than you and actually know what is going on."

 

I disagree with your assertion - because I am very interested in open discussion and I very carefully and very thoughtfully evaluate the posts of actual teachers (like Dan Carraher). However, I disagree with your claim that they "actually know what is going on". Is my personal disagreement unacceptable in a golf forum that is devoted to an open discussion of topics related to golf swing biomechanics/mechanics?

 

As to your first point, it is a fact, Your only line of argument against it is to acccess the system and data and show us why it's wrong. Thus far your arguments to the contrary have been entirely unpersuasive. The data says what it says, and it disagrees strongly with your conclusions.

[bph7]

Fort Worth Pro,

 

You wrote-: "You can disagree all you want but that would just be you choosing to be wrong. At p6 the angle between the club and left forearm is almost 100% dictated by ulnar/radial deviation."

 

I agree with you that the angle between the club and the left forearm is almost 100% dictated by radial/ulnar deviation, which happens within the plane of an intact LAFW if the golfer uses the intact LAFW/GFLW technique. However, if the intact LAFW is disrupted by a significant amount of left wrist extension, then another angle is established between the left forearm and the clubshaft in the plane of left wrist extension/flexion.

 

You also asked-: "Do you agree that the lead wrist begins extending prior to impact?"

 

I agree that the left wrist begins to extend pre-impact between P6 => P7 in golfers who use the swing technique of "combined left wrist palmar flexion + early left wrist supination" (like Gary Woodland) or who use the swing technique of dynamic left wrist palmar flexion (like Jordan Spieth), but I do not agree that the left wrist extends between P6 and P7 in golfers who use the intact LAFW/GFLW technique (like Henrik Stenson).

 

Ok, so if data was shown on stenson or any others like him showing the wrist extending, would you concede that you are wrong? If so, could you name other golfers who you believe have this release pattern? I'm sure we could find data on at least one. If you wouldn't concede you were wrong after that, then obviously you have no interest in a discussion.

[BatManOneTwo]

bph7,

 

You wrote-: "As to your first point, it is a fact, Your only line of argument against it is to access the system and data and show us why it's wrong. Thus far your arguments to the contrary have been entirely unpersuasive. The data says what it says, and it disagrees strongly with your conclusions."

 

You are free to believe that you have established incontrovertible "facts" and you are free to treat me as a second-class individual, who you deem a fool, and who you want to be banned from this forum. I personally will choose to decide whether your 3-D system has any validity if you first supply with all the relevant data on your 3D system's methodology and captured data collection.

 

What is interesting to me about your rigid "belief" that all golfers are extending their left wrist between P6 and impact is that it conflicts with Phil Cheetham's PhD dissertation research study that shows that the "average" pro golfer in his study of 92 tour professional golfers was increasingly flexing his left wrist in the late downswing between P6 and impact.

 

Here is a link to Phil Cheetham's dissertation paper - http://www.philcheetham.com/phd-dissertation-and-presentation/

 

Can you explain the discrepancy between Phil Cheetham's 3-D findings and your 3-D findings?

[rondo01]

Bump, for a great thread. My god. What did I just read. 

[Hawkeye77]

Was dead for good reasons. 

Edited June 27, 2021 by Hawkeye77

[oz dee cee]

My head is hurting… 

[sailfishchris]

The swing threads get so heated LOL!