70% of speed from hands? Where does this idea come from?

[Nels55]

6 hours ago, KD1 said:

Ive heard Monte say multiple times that hips are faster in the lpga than the pga. (maybe he repeated in this thread? I'm too lazy to go back and look) So why don't they hit it further?

Slower hips greater ground force.

Edited May 30 by Nels55

[MonteScheinblum]

In general the force when the hips decelerate seems to correlate to speed more than how fast they move.

 

Most of the data I’ve seen and most of the first hand experience I have supports this.

 

2015 Course swing 125 mph hip speed 540*/sec

2015 long drive swing 138 mph hips speed 400*/sec

 

Much sharper decel curve

 

Makes sense when you think about it.

 

You see golfers with real fast spin outs and hit it nowhere.  I remember measuring several golfers that had faster hips than Rory and they hit it nowhere 

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

In general the force when the hips decelerate seems to correlate to speed more than how fast they move.

 

As you know, too, it's not that the hips even "decelerate" in terms of the golfer actually trying to slow the hips but rather… the next segment using the hips as the platform to accelerate themselves.

 

To put it another way, when your chest fires, it pushes "back" against your hips, slowing them down so it can accelerate itself (the torso/chest). So the faster you fire the chest, the more the hips "brake" (because they're pushed back).

[Soloman1]

[MonteScheinblum]

3 hours ago, iacas said:

 

As you know, too, it's not that the hips even "decelerate" in terms of the golfer actually trying to slow the hips but rather… the next segment using the hips as the platform to accelerate themselves.

 

To put it another way, when your chest fires, it pushes "back" against your hips, slowing them down so it can accelerate itself (the torso/chest). So the faster you fire the chest, the more the hips "brake" (because they're pushed back).

And the better the lead arm accelerates the better the chest decelerates in the same fashion…….and so on…..

[TheDeanAbides]

5 hours ago, iacas said:

 

As you know, too, it's not that the hips even "decelerate" in terms of the golfer actually trying to slow the hips but rather… the next segment using the hips as the platform to accelerate themselves.

 

To put it another way, when your chest fires, it pushes "back" against your hips, slowing them down so it can accelerate itself (the torso/chest). So the faster you fire the chest, the more the hips "brake" (because they're pushed back).

Which adds to the evidence for the idea (reality( that the faster your arms/hands are moving at the end of the kenetic chain the further you'll hit the ball. 

[iacas]

5 hours ago, MonteScheinblum said:

And the better the lead arm accelerates the better the chest decelerates in the same fashion…….and so on…..

 

Yep. Each segment uses the previous one as its "platform" (against which it acts).

 

4 hours ago, TheDeanAbides said:

Which adds to the evidence for the idea (reality( that the faster your arms/hands are moving at the end of the kenetic chain the further you'll hit the ball. 

 

I haven't really argued any side of this, so…

[Nels55]

7 hours ago, TheDeanAbides said:

Which adds to the evidence for the idea (reality( that the faster your arms/hands are moving at the end of the kenetic chain the further you'll hit the ball. 

You do understand that the hands slow as the clubhead speeds up into impact?  Maximum speed would be obtained if the hands stopped at impact according to what I have read.

[TheDeanAbides]

Just now, Nels55 said:

You do understand that the hands slow as the clubhead speeds up into impact?  Maximum speed would be obtained if the hands stopped at impact according to what I have read.

Yes, they reach maximum speed around P5.5 - much earlier than most ams. It's almost as if the arms have to be moved quickly from the top to do that...

 

 

[KD1]

I was inspired to look up more Dr Kwon. I'll let you guys interpret for your selves... (or you could watch the video and get the interpretation from the source 😁)

 

HL = hips

SL = shoulder

UL = upper lead arm

WC = wrists

... I think. So are we talking about hand speed relative to the body (UL) or wrist release (WC) ?

 

Edited May 31 by KD1

[mgoblue83]

15 minutes ago, KD1 said:

I was inspired to look up more Dr Kwon. I'll let you guys interpret for your selves... (or you could watch the video and get the interpretation from the source 😁)

 

HL = hips

SL = shoulder

UL = upper lead arm

WC = wrists

... I think. So are we talking about hand speed relative to the body (UL) or wrist release (WC) ?

 

 

Just keep in mind that without enough hand and forearm strength to apply the forces generated by the rest of the swing it's going to severely limit the potential speed. All of the other stuff (ground force, rotation, sequencing) just doesn't mean anything if you can't apply the force to the handle and club. This is the ONLY reason that elite female players with perfect swings and plenty of rotational speed are only able to hit the ball 250yds or so.

[Nels55]

3 hours ago, mgoblue83 said:

 

Just keep in mind that without enough hand and forearm strength to apply the forces generated by the rest of the swing it's going to severely limit the potential speed. All of the other stuff (ground force, rotation, sequencing) just doesn't mean anything if you can't apply the force to the handle and club. This is the ONLY reason that elite female players with perfect swings and plenty of rotational speed are only able to hit the ball 250yds or so.

Women are not capable of generating enough ground force to produce the speed that men can produce.  LOL it is not because of their lack of arm strength.  

[ferrispgm]

Going back to starting the arms sooner/faster....It's something I've been working on since March as a way to delay the shoulders from firing to much too soon....I will say this....When I do it correctly, drives go from 295ish to 320+ and very straight every single time.....my lower body feels extremely stable, almost dead, hands feel slower at impact and the swing feels effortless.  On video, the hips actually clear more and the swing looks slower.  If an instructor told me this 15+ years ago, I would have never gone back.

[iacas]

6 hours ago, Nels55 said:

Women are not capable of generating enough ground force to produce the speed that men can produce.  LOL it is not because of their lack of arm strength.  

 

Oh, man… Ground forces are well down on the list of reasons why women don't hit it as far as men.

[Nels55]

44 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

Oh, man… Ground forces are well down on the list of reasons why women don't hit it as far as men.

Overall strength including arm strength is the difference.  My point is that women do not and cannot generate the same ground force peaks that men do.  And this is not because their arms are weaker.  Am I wrong about that?

[mgoblue83]

55 minutes ago, Nels55 said:

Overall strength including arm strength is the difference.  My point is that women do not and cannot generate the same ground force peaks that men do.  And this is not because their arms are weaker.  Am I wrong about that?

You are correct but the entire point is that ground forces don’t matter and rotational speed doesn’t matter if the hands and arms aren’t strong enough and fast enough to apply that force.

 

People focusing on those things before hands and arms are like people running 500hp cars with bike tires. There isn’t anyway to apply the force.

[Nels55]

18 minutes ago, mgoblue83 said:

You are correct but the entire point is that ground forces don’t matter and rotational speed doesn’t matter if the hands and arms aren’t strong enough and fast enough to apply that force.

 

People focusing on those things before hands and arms are like people running 500hp cars with bike tires. There isn’t anyway to apply the force.

I don't know about that.  I am not an expert but I have heard expert opinion that all the hands and arms do is hold onto the club.  If that is correct then anyone with really strong glute muscles most likely have enough arm strength to hang onto the club.  Anyway in my experience the opposite of what you say is true in that the focus of weight training is not on the glutes and core muscles but is on the triceps and biceps LOL.  Used to be the case anyway maybe folks are smarter now days.  But at any rate strengthening glutes and other big muscles can only help.  It is not like people running 500hp cars with bike brakes.  If you have data to support that assertion I would love to see it!  

[Nels55]

44 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

Oh, man… Ground forces are well down on the list of reasons why women don't hit it as far as men.

Overall strength including arm strength is the difference.  My point is that women do not and cannot generate the same ground force peaks that men do.  And this is not because their arms are weaker.  Am I wrong about that?

[MonteScheinblum]

59 minutes ago, Nels55 said:

Overall strength including arm strength is the difference.  My point is that women do not and cannot generate the same ground force peaks that men do.  And this is not because their arms are weaker.  Am I wrong about that?

 

I put up some data here previously that track sprinters increase their force into the ground when the downward force of the arms is greater.

 

It would be a fair assumption that it would work similarly with a golf swing.

Edited June 1 by MonteScheinblum

[Soloman1]

it’s usually expressed as a percentage of mass. women usually don’t weigh as much, so force is less.

[nikos74]

Body torque creates energy and is transferred into the arms and hands creating clubhead speed.  Normally longer arms/clubs generate more CHS than shorter arms/clubs because the lever is longer. 

 

Using the ground forces your hips and shoulders to turn thus creating torque.  Also more mass into the ground equals more overall energy.

 

So it's a combination of factors that determine CHS.

Edited June 1 by nikos74

[ThinkingPlus]

4 hours ago, nikos74 said:

Body torque creates energy and is transferred into the arms and hands creating clubhead speed.  Normally longer arms/clubs generate more CHS than shorter arms/clubs because the lever is longer.

 

Using the ground forces your hips and shoulders to turn thus creating torque.  Also more mass into the ground equals more overall energy.

 

So it's a combination of factors that determine CHS.

Stick with forces and torques. Energy has nothing to do with a golf swing.

[TheDeanAbides]

1 hour ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Stick with forces and torques. Energy has nothing to do with a golf swing.

[phizzy30]

12 hours ago, Nels55 said:

Overall strength including arm strength is the difference.  My point is that women do not and cannot generate the same ground force peaks that men do.  And this is not because their arms are weaker.  Am I wrong about that?

Part of it is because men produce more test than women do.  Strength matters.  So does flexibility and mobility where women can match or often beat us in.  Genetics plays a role as well in that the more Type II fibers a person has regardless of sex, the potential to swing faster increases.  Look at Phillis Meti.  Girl can get her ss up over 120 which is elite speed period.  Besides all the training she does, she's obviously genetically gifted in that she probably has more Type II fibers than most men.    

Edited June 1 by phizzy30

[MonteScheinblum]

3 hours ago, phizzy30 said:

Part of it is because men produce more test than women do.  Strength matters.  So does flexibility and mobility where women can match or often beat us in.  Genetics plays a role as well in that the more Type II fibers a person has regardless of sex, the potential to swing faster increases.  Look at Phillis Meti.  Girl can get her ss up over 120 which is elite speed period.  Besides all the training she does, she's obviously genetically gifted in that she probably has more Type II fibers than most men.    

What about type 10 fat?  I put that to good use.

Edited June 1 by MonteScheinblum

[b_f_c_99]

28 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

What about type 10 fat?  I put that to good use.

Yeah you do……. I kid!

[KD1]

3 hours ago, MonteScheinblum said:

What about type 10 fat?  I put that to good use.

 

Improves GRF!

[ThinkingPlus]

7 minutes ago, Jugs said:

 

You just ruined my favorite Paula video, can't see her in the same way anymore.   Who do we hold accountable Chevron or USGA.   

 

 

 

The ruling bodies aren't exactly physics geniuses.

[Shilgy]

5 hours ago, MonteScheinblum said:

What about type 10 fat?  I put that to good use.

Sounds like an old golf buddy of mine….ask him how he hits it so far and he would say “girth inertia”.🤣

[MonteScheinblum]

10 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Sounds like an old golf buddy of mine….ask him how he hits it so far and he would say “girth inertia”.🤣

If this wasn’t a family type forum, I’d have about 37 jokes about girth inertia.