Just reading all this. John, re Homers drawings of 2-C.
- they are not to scale. Not even close. The ball is about the size of a tennis ball for instance, vis a vis the club. I assume Homer did this to make the underlying geometry more obvious to the reader. To make the drawings more illustrative.
-the "ideal application" or 2-C-1 represents the ideal of total compression and therefor, per 2-C-0, assumes the point of contact between ball and face stay together, intact "as if welded together" throughout the impact interval. So if impact is prior to low point this mandates that the point of contact will go down plane all the way to it low point position (assuming the clubhead completes its orbit).
-separation is assumed to be at low point, so the shaft will therefor be vertical given a flat left wrist. You could also therefore deduce that Homer assumed a flat left wrist.
-if impact is made prior to low point there will be some shaft lean.
-shots that see the ball roll on the face even if it is solely a result of loft are not examples of "total compression". We golfers know this intuitively.....we dont tee up a driver on a 120 yard par 3 for instance. We choose a more lofted club for its inherent loss of compression. Why did Homer draw a somewhat lofted club in 2-C-1 2A then? I assume for illustrative purposes again. To highlight some of the vectors directions.
See 2-C-0 its an interesting read and concludes with:
Quote:
"The Ball leaves the Clubface with a force proportional to the compression produced by Impact. Then the ideal result of the above procedures is maximum compression. But any clubface imprecision during Impact will permit compression to leak away. Lost compression cannot be re-covered. Between the precision Impact of 2-C-1#3 and the total loss of compression in 2-C-3#3 , there can be every degree of Compression Leakage--some intentional (Back Spin) but mostly unintentional. Your main lines of defense are the Flat Left Wrist, Hinge Action and a Three Dimensional Downstroke----that is DOWNward (Attack Angle) AND OUTward (Plane Angle) AND FORward (Approach Angle) per 2-C1#2 A/B. Study 2-H, 2-N and 7-3. "
He then goes on to list Newtons first three laws.
You'll notice a relationship between the drawings of 2-C and Steering. Intentional compression loss vs. unintentional compression loss due to a common conceptual problem.
Can you see these things in slow mo? Id say yes, you can see Steering....guys verticaling a driver say... But impact is violent and distorts all of the parties to it: ball, clubface , clubshaft and clubhead. So you have to look before and after impact to see what going on.
Each of these pictures clarly show the ball getting carried downward and to the right from impact to seperation.
That would mean the ball would get pinched between the turf and the face.
When an inclined striker does that from a solid strike, it will be a fantastic picture indeed.
I look forward to seeing it.
John,
There have been a number of "pictures" posted in this thread. Please confirm you are responding to O.B. Left's post and referencing Sketches 2-C-1/2/3. Thanks.
Each of these pictures clarly show the ball getting carried downward and to the right from impact to seperation.
That would mean the ball would get pinched between the turf and the face.
When an inclined striker does that from a solid strike, it will be a fantastic picture indeed.
I look forward to seeing it.
Quote:
7-6...Even on hardpan, the Ball, normally is gone before the ground is touched.
John, Why do you frame your questions as "Challenges"? If you have something to say, simply speak up and say it. Maybe Bagger Lance will open a new discussion area titled "Challenge Forum". Anyone wanting to learn by asking "challenge questions" can post a question. Wasn't there a TV show that used "challenge questions"?
John: "I dare you to prove it to me".
Daryl: "I don't care".
John, Why do you frame your questions as "Challenges"? If you have something to say, simply speak up and say it. Maybe Bagger Lance will open a new discussion area titled "Challenge Forum". Anyone wanting to learn by asking "challenge questions" can post a question. Wasn't there a TV show that used "challenge questions"?
John: "I dare you to prove it to me".
Daryl: "I don't care".
That's not productive or positive dialogue.
It does sound combative, but as Bagger has pointed out to me, lots of people are not use to electronic conversation. If we were all having a beer, we might interpret it as a playful challenge and maybe John means it that way.
Last night thinking of Veteran's Day made me want to challenge any golfing terrorists and humiliate them verbally. I still want to!
Maybe John imagines we are TGM terrorists!
He just does not understand how low-key and passive you really are Daryl! Or maybe John is 95 and just stays pissed all day due to arthritis and 'that burning sensation."
John, just remember we have struggles, too, when you write. We are creating a community, here, of people wanting to be better golfers, not destroying a false ideology.
ICT
__________________
HP, grant me the serenity to accept what I cannot change, the courage to change what I can, and the wisdom to know the difference. Progress and not perfection is the goal every day!
It does sound combative, but as Bagger has pointed out to me, lots of people are not use to electronic conversation. If we were all having a beer, we might interpret it as a playful challenge and maybe John means it that way.
Last night thinking of Veteran's Day made me want to challenge any golfing terrorists and humiliate them verbally. I still want to!
Maybe John imagines we are TGM terrorists!
He just does not understand how low-key and passive you really are Daryl! Or maybe John is 95 and just stays pissed all day due to arthritis and 'that burning sensation."
John, just remember we have struggles, too, when you write. We are creating a community, here, of people wanting to be better golfers, not destroying a false ideology.
ICT
Innercityteacher,
Your perspective is priceless, as always. I think you're right about the "electronic media" thing. If I remember correctly, john was a golf teacher or something like that in the old days. At least I think he had something to do with golf. Your right, he's probably 95 years old, arthritis and 'that burning sensation, so he stays angry at the world all day. I think he lives in Alabama, which would answer the other questions I have about him.
John: from the top of the page : the ball does not get turf pinched. Consider that the leading edge of the club passes under the ball. The soul hits the ground.
The ball is off the face pretty darn fast. Little ball before big ball.
A pinched shot is not a pretty ball flight or set of engineering force vectors.
John: from the top of the page : the ball does not get turf pinched. Consider that the leading edge of the club passes under the ball. The soul hits the ground.
The ball is off the face pretty darn fast. Little ball before big ball.
A pinched shot is not a pretty ball flight or set of engineering force vectors.
Hi Guru,
Is the "pinched" wedge simply a "feel?'
There are so many "feels" involved in the Golfing Machine that make the game fun again for me. Some of these things, like the "heavy hit" are supposedly proven wrong by scientists, but are so real to me that I will always believe in them... was Mr. Kelley's work more "feel" based than "science" based than we realize? Not a knock on it if it is... it flat out works IMHO.
Sorry if this question is a little bit out there... it is really addressed to all...
Kevin
__________________
I could be wrong. I have been before, and will be again.
Each of these pictures clarly show the ball getting carried downward and to the right from impact to seperation.
That would mean the ball would get pinched between the turf and the face.
When an inclined striker does that from a solid strike, it will be a fantastic picture indeed.
I look forward to seeing it.
Okay, John, you have not responded to my post #71 seeking confirmation of the "pictures" you are referencing. Forging ahead, I assume (per my post) that you mean Sketches 2-C-1/2/3.
By the way, that was my fifth post written directly in response to one of your own and also the fifth one with zero reply from you. Mox nix to me, but I find it kind of interesting, especially given your insistence that people respond to yours "or else" you begin to wonder (your post #55).
Two points:
1. Look closely at Sketch #1 in each of the Series, i.e., 2-C-1 #1, 2-C-2 #1 and 2-C-3 #1. You will notice that the ball is sitting on a tee, and Low Point is clearly illustrated as occurring 'in the air'. Therefore, as specifically related to these drawings, there is no contact with the ground whatsoever, much less any "pinch" effect (which, of course, doesn't happen anyway, even with the ball on the ground).
2. In 2-C-1 and 2-C-2, your observation that the ball is being carried "downward and to the right" (On Plane) is correct. However, Sketch 2-C-3 illustrates the Lob Shot being executed as a deliberate Throwaway procedure. Hence, it is being carried neither downward nor to the right.
"Precision is recognizing and reconciling minute differentiations." [2-0]
I have several other comments -- actually, a comprehensive overview -- relating to the Sketches, their purpose and the precision depiction of the illustrated concepts. In it you will find the answers to a few of your earlier questions (and more). I will get to that task as time permits.
Hybrid Mode
