Do Not Pull On the Club from the Top of the Backswing...Stop the Handle Late In Downswing.

[betarhoalphadelta]

On 1/22/2024 at 1:55 AM, Hidraw said:

Before the thread dies, I just want to wrapup an open issue of the "feel" of @Righty to Lefty about stopping the handle late in the downswing and the reality of what "really" happened according to research data in https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3761476/




The authors derived force, acceleration, velocity at the hands from sequences of snapshots in the downswing of 4 golfers of varying handicap.  Their Figure 6 as depicted above shows the tangential force (along the hand path) and normal force (perpendicular to the hand path).  We could observe near impact that there is and abrupt action that diminishes the tangential force to zero and increase the normal force to peaks.  @Righty to Lefty may interpret this as stop the handle, but in fact the handle still moving while the direction of acceleration changes.
 

 

I did want to clarify something. There is one sense in that the direction of force changes, but there is another sense where it does not. 

 

The tangential force in these plots is ALWAYS positive. It never goes negative before impact. A "deceleration" or "braking" would be a negative force. What I would describe I see here from -0.04 seconds to 0 is more of a "coasting", where the hands are no longer applying force along the tangential path. If F=ma, and F is always positive while m is unchanged, a is always positive. So in this case, you cannot say that the data supports you that the direction of acceleration changes. Only the magnitude. So it's not "braking". 

 

What happens is that there is a DIFFERENT force that is being applied in the normal direction. I can see talking about that being a "directional" change in force, but I think that's not the best way to describe it. The reason that you see this force starting very small and then getting MUCH faster across the plot is that the clubhead speed is increasing. When talking about angular velocity and centripetal force (an analog here for "normal" force but difficult to use directly the term because the radius is not constant), a=v^2/r so F=mv^2/r. As the velocity of the club+clubhead increases, the force spikes quickly because it's proportional to the square of velocity. And as iacas also pointed out, while this would be felt by the golfer as a "pulling" force, that doesn't mean the golfer is actually moving the handle upwards away from the path. It's more that the force is merely resisting the momentum of the clubhead and it's pulling the clubhead around the radius of the arc. The "acceleration" isn't that the grip is accelerating--it's the act of changing the path of the clubhead to follow an arc rather than fly off tangentially. 

 

In neither case would it be accurate from the standpoint of physics to describe any of this as braking, though. 

[getitdaily]

E=mc^2

 

If EMC is storage then emc = ^2

 

If ^2 is squared then

 

Storage = squared

 

Squared is the shape of a box.

 

You store things in a box.

 

There you go.

[MonteScheinblum]

Countdown to when someone posts the hot/crazy matrix.

[iacas]

5 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

Countdown to when someone posts the hot/crazy matrix.

 

More like some folks here are getting a version of this graph:

 

[Valtiel]

38 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

Countdown to when someone posts the hot/crazy matrix.

 

32 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

More like some folks here are getting a version of this graph:

 

Ah yes, the Vicky Mendoza diagonal:

 

[MonteScheinblum]

3 minutes ago, Valtiel said:

 

Ah yes, the Vicky Mendoza diagonal:

 

The YouTube video that went viral is way funnier than that.  
 

Truth be told a woman friend showed me the first time and said,  “The fact this video has a bit of misogyny involved, doesn’t mean it’s not funny.”

[betarhoalphadelta]

54 minutes ago, getitdaily said:

E=mc^2

 

If EMC is storage then emc = ^2

 

If ^2 is squared then

 

Storage = squared

 

Squared is the shape of a box.

 

You store things in a box.

 

There you go.

 

I thought EMC=Dell 😉 

 

Sorry, data storage is my day job. 

 

I'll see myself out. 

[Valtiel]

15 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

The YouTube video that went viral is way funnier than that.  
 

Truth be told a woman friend showed me the first time and said,  “The fact this video has a bit of misogyny involved, doesn’t mean it’s not funny.”

That dovetails very nicely with your previous confrontational long drive experience, because things like hot/crazy matrices and the underlying “women are the emotional ones” misogyny are dependent on the great marketing efforts of men that have rebranded anger/rage/frustration as “not emotions” 😆

 

I remember the exact grip machine you’re referring to btw, they had (have?) one in the lobby of the Winchester Mystery House in San Jose, and I remember getting into the 70-80 range at around 14-15y/o. Never thought anything of it as I assumed it was “rigged” to produce flattering results for tourists. 

Edited January 25 by Valtiel

[Soloman1]

You have to admit that this has been one of the funnest topics.

 

I might start one on my study of the swing speed increase by reduced frictional forces from shaving your armpits.

[iacas]

8 minutes ago, Soloman1 said:

You have to admit that this has been one of the funnest topics.

 

I might start one on my study of the swing speed increase by reduced frictional forces from shaving your armpits.

 

Also look for my sister topic: "Swing speed on the moon: Does the decrease in air friction offset the decrease in gravity?"

[MonteScheinblum]

1 hour ago, Soloman1 said:

You have to admit that this has been one of the funnest topics.

 

I might start one on my study of the swing speed increase by reduced frictional forces from shaving your armpits.

I think shaving nether regions would be way more effective.  My avatar plays.

 

 

[MonteScheinblum]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

 

Also look for my sister topic: "Swing speed on the moon: Does the decrease in air friction offset the decrease in gravity?"

How much club speed would you have letting the arms fall with gravity?

[Soloman1]

33 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

How much club speed would you have letting the arms fall with gravity?

 

First we have to develop a detachable shoulder joint.

 

I’ll start working on it.

 

Looking for investors…

Edited January 25 by Soloman1

[Hidraw]

6 hours ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

I did want to clarify something. There is one sense in that the direction of force changes, but there is another sense where it does not. 

 

The tangential force in these plots is ALWAYS positive. It never goes negative before impact. A "deceleration" or "braking" would be a negative force. What I would describe I see here from -0.04 seconds to 0 is more of a "coasting", where the hands are no longer applying force along the tangential path. If F=ma, and F is always positive while m is unchanged, a is always positive. So in this case, you cannot say that the data supports you that the direction of acceleration changes. Only the magnitude. So it's not "braking". 

 

What happens is that there is a DIFFERENT force that is being applied in the normal direction. I can see talking about that being a "directional" change in force, but I think that's not the best way to describe it. The reason that you see this force starting very small and then getting MUCH faster across the plot is that the clubhead speed is increasing. When talking about angular velocity and centripetal force (an analog here for "normal" force but difficult to use directly the term because the radius is not constant), a=v^2/r so F=mv^2/r. As the velocity of the club+clubhead increases, the force spikes quickly because it's proportional to the square of velocity. And as iacas also pointed out, while this would be felt by the golfer as a "pulling" force, that doesn't mean the golfer is actually moving the handle upwards away from the path. It's more that the force is merely resisting the momentum of the clubhead and it's pulling the clubhead around the radius of the arc. The "acceleration" isn't that the grip is accelerating--it's the act of changing the path of the clubhead to follow an arc rather than fly off tangentially. 

 

In neither case would it be accurate from the standpoint of physics to describe any of this as braking, though. 

Braking was used here as reference to the Theodore Jorgensen's Model.  After a another look in his book, in his discription, it is the acceleration and the braking of the left shoulder that drive the swing.  So in his model, braking is applied at the left shoulder not the hands.  In his model, the tangential acceleration does not go negative before impact either.

So instead of braking, I believe, most elite golfers change the acceleration direction aka  "going normal".
 

I would prefer to view this in Nesbit's Phase 3 as not braking at the left shoulder but rather the pivot shoot the left shoulder upward and away from the target line.  As long as center of mass of the left arm and club is not in line with the direction of this force, there is a leverage (moment arm) that swings the left arm and club resulting in the normal force and tangential force at the hands.  As the leverage is spent (the offline angle is decreasing), the tangential force diminishes and the left arm becomes more and more inline with the direction of force at the left shoulder.

The left arm swings around the left shoulder.  With the left shoulder as the center of the left arm swing being displaced upward in Phase 3, don't you think that the hand is also being displaced upward also?
 

Edited January 25 by Hidraw

[Soloman1]

Not a fan of the terminology.

 

How about parts that resist and parts that release?

[TexasTurf]

52 minutes ago, Soloman1 said:

 

First we have to develop a detachable shoulder joint.

 

I’ll start working on it.

 

Looking for investors…

I've got a left one if you want to borrow it and try it out. Painful but maybe worth it for the gains.

[Valtiel]

3 hours ago, Soloman1 said:

 

First we have to develop a detachable shoulder joint.

 

I’ll start working on it.

 

Looking for investors…

I have an old family friend, one of those guys who you're told is an "uncle" who.....ain't lol. Anyway he's lovely, but he's had enough joint replacements to basically be considered bionic at this point so he'd be a good case study here. I'll DM you his address and when he's normally asleep. 😝

[iacas]

10 hours ago, MonteScheinblum said:

How much club speed would you have letting the arms fall with gravity?

 

The speed of light sounds like a reasonable estimate. Assuming there's no air friction so there's no terminal velocity, and it can fall for a long, long time. But then we'd have a problem with slow play.

 

@Hidraw I apologize in advance for being super "nasty" in this response where I illustrate how off-base you seem to be. Please feel free to tell me again how I'm unloved and will die alone. 😄 

 

Also, before I reply to you, I wanted to voice complete agreement with this:

 

9 hours ago, Soloman1 said:

Not a fan of the terminology.

 

Terminology is important.

 

9 hours ago, Hidraw said:

Braking was used here as reference to the Theodore Jorgensen's Model.

 

FWIW the letters "brak" (so "braking" or "brake") don't seem to appear in The Physics of Golf.

 

I did see this passage, though (and to be clear this is a quote from that book, in Jorgensen's voice):

 

I told him he was to pull so hard on the upper end of his left arm at the beginning of the downswing that he could feel the force he was exerting.

 

Kinda seems relevant given the title of this topic is "Do Not Pull On the Club from the Top of the Backswing".

 

9 hours ago, Hidraw said:

After a another look in his book, in his discription, it is the acceleration and the braking of the left shoulder that drive the swing.

 

Now is a good time to note that the rest of the title of the topic is "Stop the Handle Late In Downswing," and that's the context of almost all previous discussion.

 

I realize you and the rest of us were saddled with "braking" as the term, as well, and the original video definitely showed @Righty to Lefty actively slamming on the brakes with the handle, but "braking" is a poor term as @Soloman1 has said because it implies not only an active deceleration, but a sudden, rapid one as well. Paired with the word "stop" as in unmoving, which we all at least understood to be a "feel" only as clearly nobody literally stops the handle… you were at a major disadvantage from the outset.

 

The truth is that the segments of the body accelerate and decelerate during the downswing. We've known this for a long time. It's commonly seen in graphs like this one from a long drive competitor:

 

 

But… there are a whole host of reasons why a segment slows down, and almost none of them are active, while exactly zero of them are completely "stop" during the downswing.

 

For example, rear your arm back and throw a punch at the air, as hard as you can. Your fist will accelerate and decelerate due to range of motion constraints, and owing to the fact that your muscles, depending on their orientation and range, will have a different capacity to generate or maintain (or increase) speed.

 

If we label the segments as they go outward A, B, C, and D… consider that accelerating segment B acts on segment A, accelerating segment C acts on segment B, and accelerating segment D acts on segment C.

 

Those segments are "squishy." They're not fixed in place, like hopefully our feet are to the ground. So, while the force going into our feet and into the ground is countered at nearly 100%… the same is not true of segment B acting on segment A, or C on B, or D on C.

 

 

That's evident there. When Chris tries to turn his chest in one direction… his hips — without the ground below to provide a reaction force — go the other way.

 

In other words, the golfer's intent to speed up the chest "pushes" on the hips in the opposite direction, slowing them down somewhat. The golfer's intent to speed up the arms at a point in the swing pushes on the chest, slowing it down. And the golfer's intent to speed up the clubhead pushes back on the arms, slowing them down a bit.

 

It's not "braking" the handle of the club. It's not even slowing the handle down (more on that in a bit). It's in fact speeding up the next segment.

 

Additionally, we can see that the peak hand speed in a golfer often occurs around P5.5. Thus, peak grip speed occurs there, too, by all accounts. But… this is just linear speed, and there are two kinds of movement occurring in a golf swing. I'm not going to get into it, but rotational forces (torques, with moments, etc.) and linear forces are both at play. The math gets a bit more complex than a seventh-grade level, and happens very fast.

 

9 hours ago, Hidraw said:

So in his model, braking is applied at the left shoulder not the hands.  In his model, the tangential acceleration does not go negative before impact either.

 

It's funny you have now moved to the left shoulder given his advice to the young golfer on the range (and the golfer's subsequent success) from my quote above was to "pull so hard on the upper end of his left arm". Now, you may correctly point out that he doesn't say anything about what the golfer was to do 0.03 seconds before impact or something, but… I think it's pretty well understood the golfer wasn't trying to actively or with intent slow his left shoulder at any point in the downswing.

 

9 hours ago, Hidraw said:

So instead of braking, I believe, most elite golfers change the acceleration direction aka  "going normal".

 

Every golfer does that. The shaft lines up at some point, and the shaft pulls in that direction. I don't know that you understand what "going normal" is. The only real difference between bad golfers and elite golfers is when this happens: bad golfers "go normal" a little earlier, and their magnitudes tend to be smaller (as they swing slower). Bad golfers flip, good golfers line it up a little later.

 

FWIW, the simple view is "going normal" is merely holding onto the grip of the club as the club lines up or kicks out.

 

9 hours ago, Hidraw said:

I would prefer to view this in Nesbit's Phase 3 as not braking at the left shoulder but rather the pivot shoot the left shoulder upward and away from the target line.

 

The left shoulder is working up and away from the target line almost the entire downswing.

 

 

Also, if you can identify exactly where that left shoulder "brakes" I'd be curious. You'll be seeing something I dare say almost nobody else would see, as that shoulder will appear to almost everyone to continue rotating even after impact at a pretty good clip.

 

9 hours ago, Hidraw said:

As long as center of mass of the left arm and club is not in line with the direction of this force, there is a leverage (moment arm) that swings the left arm and club resulting in the normal force and tangential force at the hands.  As the leverage is spent (the offline angle is decreasing), the tangential force diminishes and the left arm becomes more and more inline with the direction of force at the left shoulder.

 

None of which would accurately be described as "braking."

 

9 hours ago, Hidraw said:

The left arm swings around the left shoulder.  With the left shoulder as the center of the left arm swing being displaced upward in Phase 3, don't you think that the hand is also being displaced upward also?

 

We know what the hand path is. If you want to talk about parametric acceleration, that's a different topic altogether.

 

——————————————————

 

My summary:

 

The title of this forum topic is "Do Not Pull On the Club from the Top of the Backswing...Stop the Handle Late In Downswing." Examining each part:

 

Do Not Pull On the Club from the Top of the Backswing

 

Better yet, DO!

 

Stop the Handle Late In Downswing

 

Better yet, DON'T!

 

I spent more time than I am comfortable specifying looking for an old post of mine here. I believe it was in response to @Righty to Lefty and the general message was: "I think I would have a hard time intentionally making a post as wrong as this one. If you literally say the opposite of everything you just said, you'd be much closer to making an accurate post than what you've written." (If anyone can find that, I'll be indebted to you in a small way, and I send my thanks in advance.)

 

I'm doubling down on that. Golfers would have more success literally doing the opposite of almost everything @Righty to Lefty says about the golf swing than doing what he says to do.

 

"Pull on the club from the top, keep moving the whole downswing" is more accurate than the current title of this topic.

 

 

 

Edited January 25 by iacas
video didn't embed

[Valtiel]

27 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

The speed of light sounds like a reasonable estimate. Assuming there's no air friction so there's no terminal velocity, and it can fall for a long, long time. But then we'd have a problem with slow play.

 

@Hidraw I apologize in advance for being super "nasty" in this response where I illustrate how off-base you seem to be. Please feel free to tell me again how I'm unloved and will die alone. 😄 

 

Also, before I reply to you, I wanted to voice complete agreement with this:

 

 

Terminology is important.

 

 

FWIW the letters "brak" (so "braking" or "brake") don't seem to appear in The Physics of Golf.

 

I did see this passage, though (and to be clear this is a quote from that book, in Jorgensen's voice):

 

I told him he was to pull so hard on the upper end of his left arm at the beginning of the downswing that he could feel the force he was exerting.

 

Kinda seems relevant given the title of this topic is "Do Not Pull On the Club from the Top of the Backswing".

 

 

Now is a good time to note that the rest of the title of the topic is "Stop the Handle Late In Downswing," and that's the context of almost all previous discussion.

 

I realize you and the rest of us were saddled with "braking" as the term, as well, and the original video definitely showed @Righty to Lefty actively slamming on the brakes with the handle, but "braking" is a poor term as @Soloman1 has said because it implies not only an active deceleration, but a sudden, rapid one as well. Paired with the word "stop" as in unmoving, which we all at least understood to be a "feel" only as clearly nobody literally stops the handle… you were at a major disadvantage from the outset.

 

The truth is that the segments of the body accelerate and decelerate during the downswing. We've known this for a long time. It's commonly seen in graphs like this one from a long drive competitor:

 

 

But… there are a whole host of reasons why a segment slows down, and almost none of them are active, while exactly zero of them are completely "stop" during the downswing.

 

For example, rear your arm back and throw a punch at the air, as hard as you can. Your fist will accelerate and decelerate due to range of motion constraints, and owing to the fact that your muscles, depending on their orientation and range, will have a different capacity to generate or maintain (or increase) speed.

 

If we label the segments as they go outward A, B, C, and D… consider that accelerating segment B acts on segment A, accelerating segment C acts on segment B, and accelerating segment D acts on segment C.

 

Those segments are "squishy." They're not fixed in place, like hopefully our feet are to the ground. So, while the force going into our feet and into the ground is countered at nearly 100%… the same is not true of segment B acting on segment A, or C on B, or D on C.

 

 

That's evident there. When Chris tries to turn his chest in one direction… his hips — without the ground below to provide a reaction force — go the other way.

 

In other words, the golfer's intent to speed up the chest "pushes" on the hips in the opposite direction, slowing them down somewhat. The golfer's intent to speed up the arms at a point in the swing pushes on the chest, slowing it down. And the golfer's intent to speed up the clubhead pushes back on the arms, slowing them down a bit.

 

It's not "braking" the handle of the club. It's not even slowing the handle down (more on that in a bit). It's in fact speeding up the next segment.

 

Additionally, we can see that the peak hand speed in a golfer often occurs around P5.5. Thus, peak grip speed occurs there, too, by all accounts. But… this is just linear speed, and there are two kinds of movement occurring in a golf swing. I'm not going to get into it, but rotational forces (torques, with moments, etc.) and linear forces are both at play. The math gets a bit more complex than a seventh-grade level, and happens very fast.

 

 

It's funny you have now moved to the left shoulder given his advice to the young golfer on the range (and the golfer's subsequent success) from my quote above was to "pull so hard on the upper end of his left arm". Now, you may correctly point out that he doesn't say anything about what the golfer was to do 0.03 seconds before impact or something, but… I think it's pretty well understood the golfer wasn't trying to actively or with intent slow his left shoulder at any point in the downswing.

 

 

Every golfer does that. The shaft lines up at some point, and the shaft pulls in that direction. I don't know that you understand what "going normal" is. The only real difference between bad golfers and elite golfers is when this happens: bad golfers "go normal" a little earlier, and their magnitudes tend to be smaller (as they swing slower). Bad golfers flip, good golfers line it up a little later.

 

FWIW, the simple view is "going normal" is merely holding onto the grip of the club as the club lines up or kicks out.

 

 

The left shoulder is working up and away from the target line almost the entire downswing.

 

 

Also, if you can identify exactly where that left shoulder "brakes" I'd be curious. You'll be seeing something I dare say almost nobody else would see, as that shoulder will appear to almost everyone to continue rotating even after impact at a pretty good clip.

 

 

None of which would accurately be described as "braking."

 

 

We know what the hand path is. If you want to talk about parametric acceleration, that's a different topic altogether.

 

——————————————————

 

My summary:

 

The title of this forum topic is "Do Not Pull On the Club from the Top of the Backswing...Stop the Handle Late In Downswing." Examining each part:

 

Do Not Pull On the Club from the Top of the Backswing

 

Better yet, DO!

 

Stop the Handle Late In Downswing

 

Better yet, DON'T!

 

I spent more time than I am comfortable specifying looking for an old post of mine here. I believe it was in response to @Righty to Lefty and the general message was: "I think I would have a hard time intentionally making a post as wrong as this one. If you literally say the opposite of everything you just said, you'd be much closer to making an accurate post than what you've written." (If anyone can find that, I'll be indebted to you in a small way, and I send my thanks in advance.)

 

I'm doubling down on that. Golfers would have more success literally doing the opposite of almost everything @Righty to Lefty says about the golf swing than doing what he says to do.

 

"Pull on the club from the top, keep moving the whole downswing" is more accurate than the current title of this topic.

 

 

 

This one here I reckon. 

[iacas]

17 minutes ago, Valtiel said:

This one here I reckon. 

 

Thank you! That was it. I could have sworn it was more of my usual length, and my memory of it was that it was well before Christmas, not right after.

 

Merci beaucoup. You're welcome to come for a free hour of GEARS any time in 2024.

[Hidraw]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Do Not Pull On the Club from the Top of the Backswing

 

Better yet, DO!

 

1 hour ago, iacas said:

 

Terminology is important.

If "Pull On the Club from the Top of Swing" is conceptualized as similar to pulling the arrow from the quiver on our back, then it is fine with me.  But pulling usually connotes the action of bringing object closer to the body which not what we want here.

 

 

1 hour ago, iacas said:

 

Terminology is important.

 

11 hours ago, Hidraw said:

Braking was used here as reference to the Theodore Jorgensen's Model.

 

FWIW the letters "brak" (so "braking" or "brake") don't seem to appear in The Physics of Golf.

 

I should have use the precise term "Theodore Jorgensen's Mathematical Model".   Because, it is a simplified model so as to be tractable with the Lagrangian Method.   It is not a model for teaching!

He used the term negative acceleration here.  I thing "negative acceleration", "deceleration" and "braking" are synonyms.

Edited January 25 by Hidraw

[Hidraw]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

 

11 hours ago, Hidraw said:

As long as center of mass of the left arm and club is not in line with the direction of this force, there is a leverage (moment arm) that swings the left arm and club resulting in the normal force and tangential force at the hands.  As the leverage is spent (the offline angle is decreasing), the tangential force diminishes and the left arm becomes more and more inline with the direction of force at the left shoulder.

 

None of which would accurately be described as "braking."

Urghhhh.   We have two swing models here, one from Jorgensen and another from Nesbit.  I am discussing the Nesbit Model here, no braking here.

[Valtiel]

59 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

Thank you! That was it. I could have sworn it was more of my usual length, and my memory of it was that it was well before Christmas, not right after.

 

Merci beaucoup. You're welcome to come for a free hour of GEARS any time in 2024.

I will very likely be in North Huntingdon later this year so I might take you up on that! Just a few stones throws away. 

[iacas]

12 minutes ago, Hidraw said:

If "Pull On the Club from the Top of Swing" is conceptualized as similar to pulling the arrow from the quiver on our back, then it is fine with me.  But pulling usually connotes the action of bringing object closer to the body which not what we want here.

 

Regardless, he specifically talked about (in several posts which may not all be here in this thread) about "letting gravity" do the work until about P6 (which also leaves very little time to do any work before you "brake" the handle).

 

So, that may be how you interpreted it, but it's not what he was saying.

 

And that's why terminology is important.

 

12 minutes ago, Hidraw said:

He used the term negative acceleration here.  I thing "negative acceleration", "deceleration" and "braking" are synonyms.

 

I don't.

 

At this point I'm done with this topic. Almost everything @Righty to Lefty says is more accurate in the inverse, and like both he and his Bounce Boy Brother, I find the manner in which you "discuss" to be intellectually dishonest, almost completely glossing over/ignoring the points made against you.

 

4 minutes ago, Valtiel said:

I will very likely be in North Huntingdon later this year so I might take you up on that! Just a few stones throws away. 

 

Nice! Text me when you know some dates. Hopefully it can line up.

[betarhoalphadelta]

1 hour ago, Hidraw said:

If "Pull On the Club from the Top of Swing" is conceptualized as similar to pulling the arrow from the quiver on our back, then it is fine with me.  But pulling usually connotes the action of bringing object closer to the body which not what we want here.
 

 

Obviously "pull" can have multiple connotations. As R2L tried to explain by using Monte's video where Monte talks about a tendency to yank on the handle and why that's bad (when done wrong you get steep) and trying to use that as evidence Monte says you shouldn't "pull". But then R2L tried to extend that into the idea that you shouldn't by trying to apply force to accelerate the club until around P6, then apparently you SHOULD apply force, and then you should try to brake it. 

 

But in this thread, you're trying to have an involved physics discussion, which is fine. I'm an engineer. I love geeking out over physics. But you're seemingly trying to use physics to defend R2L's statements, and in that area I think you're flat wrong. 

 

The truth is that golfers pull on the club from the top of the backswing (and should do so, albeit in the correct manner), and golfers DON'T stop the handle in the downswing (and shouldn't). 

 

[Hidraw]

18 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

Obviously "pull" can have multiple connotations. As R2L tried to explain by using Monte's video where Monte talks about a tendency to yank on the handle and why that's bad (when done wrong you get steep) and trying to use that as evidence Monte says you shouldn't "pull". But then R2L tried to extend that into the idea that you shouldn't by trying to apply force to accelerate the club until around P6, then apparently you SHOULD apply force, and then you should try to brake it. 

 

But in this thread, you're trying to have an involved physics discussion, which is fine. I'm an engineer. I love geeking out over physics. But you're seemingly trying to use physics to defend R2L's statements, and in that area I think you're flat wrong. 

 

The truth is that golfers pull on the club from the top of the backswing (and should do so, albeit in the correct manner), and golfers DON'T stop the handle in the downswing (and shouldn't). 

 

No, I was not trying to use physics to defend R2L's statement.  From what I could gather, R2L has a functional golf swing.  I was trying to untangle what R2L was saying from what he was conceptualizing from his feels.  Now you have to untangle my statement :).

 

[Hidraw]

41 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

But in this thread, you're trying to have an involved physics discussion, which is fine. I'm an engineer. I love geeking out over physics.

Great to have a real engineer here.
I have a couple of mechanical problems I am chewing on relating to the discussion in this thread, with some ideas to be verified.
1.  Understanding the trace of the instaneous centers of curvature in the Nesbit's Numerical Model,
2.  The application of conservation of angular momentum in a golf swing.
The two issues may be related.

Are they interesting enough for you to get involved in a physics discussion?
 

Edited January 25 by Hidraw

[Hawkeye77]

7 minutes ago, Hidraw said:

Great to have a real engineer here.
I have a couple of mechanical problems I am chewing on relating to the discussion in this thread, with some ideas to be verified.
1.  Understanding the trace of the instaneous centers of curvature in the Nesbit's Numerical Model,
2.  The application of conservation of angular momentum in a golf swing.
The two issues may be related.

Are they interesting enough for you to get involved in a physics discussion?
 

DON’T BITE!!!!

[iacas]

14 minutes ago, Hidraw said:

2.  The application of conservation of angular momentum in a golf swing.

 

The golf swing is not a closed system.

 

Those questions are off topic, and especially as you're not the OP… this topic should probably be closed. Nearly all of what R2L said is wrong. Let's leave it at that.

 

I recommend you start your own topic.

[Hidraw]

3 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

The golf swing is not a closed system.

 

Those questions are off topic, and especially as you're not the OP… this topic should probably be closed. Nearly all of what R2L said is wrong. Let's leave it at that.

 

I recommend you start your own topic.

I thought that you were gone and started to miss you.
I am not trying to defy the theory.  I said "application" of it, which should be applicable for a period when the transfer of angular momentum of a system to/from the environment is insignificant.

The above issues are very interesting and may quite be beneficial to our golf swing, IMOP.

But if not enough fish bite, I'll give up the discussion.