I feel the club, especially with the driver (or low-loft shots), got pushed back or paused a bit by the impact when "hitting" a "solid" shot, which I believe the "line of compression" must have been "sustained" pretty well.
__________________ Yani Tseng, Go! Go! Go! Yani Tseng Did It Again! YOU load and sustain the "LAG", during which the "LAW" releases it, ideally beyond impact.
"Sustain (Yang/陽) the lag (Yin/陰)" is "the unification of Ying and Yang" (陰陽合一).
The "LAW" creates the "effect", which is the "motion" or "feel", with the "cause", which is the "intent" or "command".
"Lag" is the secret of golf, passion is the secret of life.
Think as a golfer, execute like a robot.
Rotate, twist, spin, turn. Bend the shaft.
What about TRANSFER OF MOMENTUM(mass in motion)? It takes longer for a freight train to slow down than it does an ant. If the momentum of the train could be transferred into the ball....well.
Also... what about the 3rd law of motion(action/reaction)?
Transfer of Momentum occurs in both cases.
What is really being considered is that at impact, the resistance the clubhead encounters will reduce the acceleration. In the first case, no golfer - just a club, it is assuming that this resistance will be meet with effort to overcome, whereas with the golfer and mass of golfer somehow it will either be overcome or reduced.
In this example we have assumed that a golf club with a golfer can achieve the same acceleration as one with a golfer. That being the case we must then say the self powered golf club can and will in fact work as the one with the golfer and mass.
Newton's 3rd law - "In a system where no external forces are present, every action force is always opposed by an equal and opposite reaction force." or "When one body interacts with a second body, the force of the firs body on the second is equal is magnitude but opposite in direction to the force of the second body on the first. F2 on 1 = -F1 on 2" appllies.
As I stated the clubhead and ball no not of the golfer (golfer could be 1 foot tall, 300 lbs or 8 foot tall and 100 lbs), but what properties of the clubhead exist and the golf ball.
This could, maybe not the best example, equated to when you enter a curve and then accelerate out of the curve to hold the curve path. Don't want to discuss centripetal or centrifugal forces here. What I am reading and hearing, is that the golf club with the golfer will in fact apply additional force (be it active or inactive) to attempt to overcome any resistance of impact. I submit that the self powered golf club will do the same since it was capable of achieving the same acceleration, etc. that the golfer powered golf club.
This is all theorical (don't know of a self power golf club except that one that used a gun shell to move pin into the ball), for golfers of different masses and same techniques we find that we have the same situation and that is both using the same technique, should be able to compensate equally.
Another side note, since the golf stroke (proper technique) will not achieve it's maximum's till 'inline' relationships are meant, both golfers of varying sizes still should have sufficent force to be applied before reaching thier maximum.
What about TRANSFER OF MOMENTUM(mass in motion)? It takes longer for a freight train to slow down than it does an ant. If the momentum of the train could be transferred into the ball....well.
Also... what about the 3rd law of motion(action/reaction)?
Transfer of Momentum occurs in both cases.
What is really being considered is that at impact, the resistance the clubhead encounters will reduce the acceleration. In the first case, no golfer - just a club, it is assuming that this resistance will be meet with effort to overcome, whereas with the golfer and mass of golfer somehow it will either be overcome or reduced.
In this example we have assumed that a golf club with a golfer can achieve the same acceleration as one with a golfer. That being the case we must then say the self powered golf club can and will in fact work as the one with the golfer and mass.
Newton's 3rd law - "In a system where no external forces are present, every action force is always opposed by an equal and opposite reaction force." or "When one body interacts with a second body, the force of the firs body on the second is equal is magnitude but opposite in direction to the force of the second body on the first. F2 on 1 = -F1 on 2" appllies.
As I stated the clubhead and ball no not of the golfer (golfer could be 1 foot tall, 300 lbs or 8 foot tall and 100 lbs), but what properties of the clubhead exist and the golf ball.
This could, maybe not the best example, equated to when you enter a curve and then accelerate out of the curve to hold the curve path. Don't want to discuss centripetal or centrifugal forces here. What I am reading and hearing, is that the golf club with the golfer will in fact apply additional force (be it active or inactive) to attempt to overcome any resistance of impact. I submit that the self powered golf club will do the same since it was capable of achieving the same acceleration, etc. that the golfer powered golf club.
This is all theorical (don't know of a self power golf club except that one that used a gun shell to move pin into the ball), for golfers of different masses and same techniques we find that we have the same situation and that is both using the same technique, should be able to compensate equally.
Another side note, since the golf stroke (proper technique) will not achieve it's maximum's till 'inline' relationships are meant, both golfers of varying sizes still should have sufficent force to be applied before reaching thier maximum.
It sounds like what you believe, as it would apply to human golfers... is that the big guys (Big Cat type guys) that hit the ball further than the little guys with similar type swings... are doing so primarily because they can accelerate the club faster, and that their MASS or size has nothing to do with it. The tall guy's longer levers, of course, is a different thing(leverage and arc). Does everyone agree... EdZ... what do you think on this?
Your mentioning of centrifugal, centripetal, and curvilinear are also good ideas for DISCUSSION in the LAB!!
Here is where IMO you can see a difference in this discussion. The self powered club can be as long as you want BUT when a golfer is attached to the club, the human factor comes into play. It will vary between golfers, not necessarily height or size, but there is a limit that each golfer can handle efficently and effectively.
But the theory is the longer the club, the more speed than can be obtained cause of the length the clubhead travels in orbit.
Kind of like swinging a 5 iron and a driver the same, the clubhead speed will be greater for the longer club. This also holds true for accelleration.
Certainly a golfer's size and physical construction can make a difference, but as we see every day golfers come in all sizes and shapes and they all can strike the ball an equally good distance and we see wee-ones out hitting the big-ones at times. Body size alone does not ensure anything, it is how it is used, the technique applied, etc. Being in good shape is a good start, having flexibility certainly helps some techniques more than others, but having a coordinated body and movements is key over size.
No doubt that the longer lever is generally a bigger advantage than more mass, however I would indeed be curious to see data on same speed, center contact by two 'machines' with different mass.
If you were somehow to assume that resistence to deceleration at impact were always the same given a club of the same mass, then it would be the case that they would produce similar shots.
However if you took a club and tied it to a string and were somehow able to swing it at the same speed as a club connected to a steel rod, the steel rod would provide more resistence to deceleration. I suppose the actual speed here would also be a big factor, a slower moving club not resisting decel as much as a faster moving one. At a slow speed it could literally 'bounce' off the ball.
Again, it would be nice to see some data from Ping or similar on just how much difference mass can make in real world golf swings.
I wonder if it boils down to 'arm weight', as a 'heavier lever'.
__________________
"Support the On Plane Swinging Force in Balance"
"we have no friends, we have no enemies, we have only teachers"
Simplicity buffs, see 5-0, 1-L, 2-0 A and B 10-2-B, 4-D, 6B-1D, 6-B-3-0-1, 6-C-1, 6-E-2
No doubt that the longer lever is generally a bigger advantage than more mass, however I would indeed be curious to see data on same speed, center contact by two 'machines' with different mass.
If you were somehow to assume that resistence to deceleration at impact were always the same given a club of the same mass, then it would be the case that they would produce similar shots.
However if you took a club and tied it to a string and were somehow able to swing it at the same speed as a club connected to a steel rod, the steel rod would provide more resistence to deceleration. I suppose the actual speed here would also be a big factor, a slower moving club not resisting decel as much as a faster moving one. At a slow speed it could literally 'bounce' off the ball.
Again, it would be nice to see some data from Ping or similar on just how much difference mass can make in real world golf swings.
I wonder if it boils down to 'arm weight', as a 'heavier lever'.
Ed, I don't believe you will find any Imperical Data regarding a golfer''s mass. The mass involved with clubhead speed and acceleration relates to the clubhead.
The thought of the arm weight as a 'heavier lever' would only impact the ability to move the club. Would the arms experience overrun? Would the heavier arms continue at a faster rate than the smaller arms after the resistance has been meet? Since both arms would be moving at the same rate, meeting resistance the lighter arm would have to apply more force than the heavier to attempt to maintain the previous rate. Here the lighter arm could exceed its capability before the heavier arm. Also it took more effort to get the heavier arm moving equal to the lighter arm.
It is a thought. I could equate this to what happens to electical motors but I would have to substitute mass for horsepower. When both motors running at the same speed come across resistance, they will attempt to maintain speed by drawing more current. Obviously the motor with the lower horsepower will when reaching its peak, slow down while the other will continue till it reaches its peak. The mass had negligible if any effect.
Plus we need to keep in mind that the golf ball weight is about 1/8 to 1/10 that of the clubhead and the clubhead is moving while the ball is static.
Right Forearm? It is something to think about, but with role of the rt arm between swinger and hitters, one has to wonder if it just doesn't come down to technique and the individual golfers attributes including being able to apply them efficently.
Sorry, I have probably overstayed my time on this topic...
No doubt that the longer lever is generally a bigger advantage than more mass, however I would indeed be curious to see data on same speed, center contact by two 'machines' with different mass.
If you were somehow to assume that resistence to deceleration at impact were always the same given a club of the same mass, then it would be the case that they would produce similar shots.
However if you took a club and tied it to a string and were somehow able to swing it at the same speed as a club connected to a steel rod, the steel rod would provide more resistence to deceleration. I suppose the actual speed here would also be a big factor, a slower moving club not resisting decel as much as a faster moving one. At a slow speed it could literally 'bounce' off the ball.
Again, it would be nice to see some data from Ping or similar on just how much difference mass can make in real world golf swings.
I wonder if it boils down to 'arm weight', as a 'heavier lever'.
Ed, I don't believe you will find any Imperical Data regarding a golfer''s mass. The mass involved with clubhead speed and acceleration relates to the clubhead.
The thought of the arm weight as a 'heavier lever' would only impact the ability to move the club. Would the arms experience overrun? Would the heavier arms continue at a faster rate than the smaller arms after the resistance has been meet? Since both arms would be moving at the same rate, meeting resistance the lighter arm would have to apply more force than the heavier to attempt to maintain the previous rate. Here the lighter arm could exceed its capability before the heavier arm. Also it took more effort to get the heavier arm moving equal to the lighter arm.
It is a thought. I could equate this to what happens to electical motors but I would have to substitute mass for horsepower. When both motors running at the same speed come across resistance, they will attempt to maintain speed by drawing more current. Obviously the motor with the lower horsepower will when reaching its peak, slow down while the other will continue till it reaches its peak. The mass had negligible if any effect.
Plus we need to keep in mind that the golf ball weight is about 1/8 to 1/10 that of the clubhead and the clubhead is moving while the ball is static.
Right Forearm? It is something to think about, but with role of the rt arm between swinger and hitters, one has to wonder if it just doesn't come down to technique and the individual golfers attributes including being able to apply them efficently.
Sorry, I have probably overstayed my time on this topic...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
One theory related to this is that if the golfer is swinging utilizing his CORE... he will transfer the entire MASS of his rotating body into the ball. If he comes out of his core or was never in it, he is only using the weight of his arms. The TGM equivalent to this is probably PIVOT LAG which acts like a "gear train".6-C-O
In your example, that 10mph 2x4 is like an 'average' golfer. There is speed, but generally not much mass. Not much 'support' behind impact.
That 10mph car is a tour player - same speed, more mass. Lots of 'support' behind impact.
So the question is, how do you get MASS in your swing.
And the answer, to put it simply - is maximum lag PRESSURE
Which in a 'feel' sense is a HEAVY club. Feeling PP#3.
Brian's 'shopping cart' image.
How many times have you watched a tour player take an easy swing, yet the ball rockets off the face? The reason, they have the proper sequence that maintains lag pressure and thus delivers MASS to impact.
Extensor action is a great shortcut. As are 'slow motion' drills - hitting your 160 club only 100 yards with a full, smooth, flowing motion.
Sustain the line of compression
__________________
"Support the On Plane Swinging Force in Balance"
"we have no friends, we have no enemies, we have only teachers"
Simplicity buffs, see 5-0, 1-L, 2-0 A and B 10-2-B, 4-D, 6B-1D, 6-B-3-0-1, 6-C-1, 6-E-2
We are getting statements here that may apply to Hitting but not Swinging. For Swinging, it is only necessary to keep the butt of the club ahead of the clubhead through the Impact Interval and to keep it from backing up, which does not require a lot of mass. Swinging produces a "whallop", which comes solely from CF. Mass can contribute only to the extent that it can provide left arm speed from rotation. This idea of getting more mass into the stroke is a Hitting notion.
Linear Mode
