|
Quote:
|
[quote=Mathew;50443]
Let me ask some very simple easy questions - Forget your 7 example - Just take the primary lever assembly and forget everything else.... The question is does the left shoulder move upwards from impact and through low point? - Yes that is a fact. YES - I agree. Let me add that I'd say in most players the left shoulder would move upwards when the hands are a little below hip high on the downswing. So the clubhead could be or probably hasn't dropped below hip high on the downswing at the start of the left shoulder moving up. Since the left shoulder moving upwards does this mean the whole primary lever assembly is also moving upwards? - Yes- this is a fact. NO- I don't see it that way- see my understanding above. But if we keep discussing this I should be able to understand your point or you mine. Since the whole primary lever assembly moves upwards and the clubhead is a part of the primary lever assembly - does this move the clubhead upwards too? - Yes this is a fact. NO- Again I don't see that but hopefully with my answers here - we can get to "common ground". Since the left shoulder is continually moving upwards mean that this effect is only going to make the clubhead orbit have its lowest point prior to the point it passes the left shoulder when viewed directly from the front - Yes , Yes, YES.... NO- That's why I thought the "7" example was a good one to show my perspective. Also, If you are saying that when the left shoulder moves upward that the clubhead moves upward- then I'd say that with that logic - then the clubhead would need to start moving upward when it was halfway down - on the downswing. QUOTE] Matthew, See my comments above. Let me know what you think. And why is it that no one thinks I'm funny? :confused1 Gotcha- Cause I'm not! #-o Well that's not going to stop me from harassing UPP and Bucket!! |
A naive view.......
Since the left shoulder moving upwards does this mean the whole primary lever assembly is also moving upwards? - Yes- this is a fact. NO- I don't see it that way- see my understanding above. But if we keep discussing this I should be able to understand your point or you mine.
I do not think so either. The primary lever assembly is staying level. The left shoulder rises but the right shoulder is going downplane. Then as the swing gets to both arms straight, that approximates low point assuming minimal throwaway.... How is that? Too simplistic? UPP in snowy but warming Ohio |
Quote:
Quote:
If I climbed the empire state building holding a golf club in my left hand, the left shoulder will have moved upwards as does the entire primary lever assembly. Perhaps your Mr. Stretch .... :rolleyes: Quote:
So you must think is it possible to be holding the club in your left hand and the clubhead to be on pluto and the left shoulder here on earth ? There is no common ground. Your arguements are ludicrious and deserve to be mocked....:laughing1 Quote:
Obviously you don't grasp obvious things... Your crazy counterarguement doesn't have any logic and is just a disingenious strawman. Quote:
Quote:
|
[quote=Mike O;50453][quote=Mathew;50443]
Since the left shoulder moving upwards does this mean the whole primary lever assembly is also moving upwards? - Yes- this is a fact. NO- I don't see it that way- see my understanding above. But if we keep discussing this I should be able to understand your point or you mine. QUOTE] Matthew, My main intent for having our continuing discussions like these is to learn. That usually works in two different ways 1) Since your view point is on the surface different than mine (you think if the left shoulder moves up in relation to the ground - then every portion of the primary lever system moves up in relation to the ground- where I don't)- In my mind I believe that I might be missing something and that you may have some information that would allow me to learn something or take a look at something in a new perspective- so I continue conversing to get to the bottom of the differnce in understanding. 2) During the process of proving one's point or analyzing it and trying to better communicate it- one learns things which allow one to understand the subject matter better and communicate it better. My intent at the end of the day isn't to "win" an argument- that's secondary to learning. Since I'm probably "good" up through algebra in mathematics- and I would imagine that you might have higher mathmatical skills- I really believe that you might have ideas and concepts that I could learn from - if I didn't have that thought I wouldn't be continuing the conversation. That said - just realize that I'm not "blind" nor unmoveable- so I continue the conversation believing that we can make some head way. I don't see the conversation as some might- "Hey, you guys are just discussing some minor issue bla bla - not that important etc. - let it go" - because as I said above- the thing I like about these conversations is that you do learn- and that's really my only goal and I've already done that- but I'll post that another time later in the thread when I might not be so concerned about creating more confusion. The first two paragraphs here - are just to clarify the context of my posts- since they represent "my mental approach"- if for any reason you think they are completely or somewhat inaccurate- then no problem but let's not debate that- because then it just becomes he said she said- So with that - let's get back to more and more specifics and see if we can get somewhere - where at least we understand where the other person is coming from and/or adjusting our viewpoints. See the quote in this post above- with your original question/answer and my reply: Then you replied to my answer on that quote: Oh come on.... If I climbed the empire state building holding a golf club in my left hand, the left shoulder will have moved upwards as does the entire primary lever assembly. Perhaps your Mr. Stretch .... Let me continue to stay on the topic we are on and show you - in what way I agree with you - and - in what way I don't- hopefully it will get us somewhere. Likewise - As I try to do with any of my statements in response to your posts- it might help if you explain in what way you agree with the statements in my posts and in what way you don't agree with the statements- and why. Hopefully the below will clarify the quote at the top and your response bolded in the middle of this post. A) If you are in a stationary position- say at impact fix- and you just raise your shoulder- I agree that the whole primary lever assembly is going to raise up. B) If you are in a rotating system- like the golf swing- then at anytime the left shoulder is rotating up- in relation to the ground- that does not mean that the "entire" primary lever system- i.e. every point along it - is going to be moving up in relation to the ground. The Primary lever system is the entire lead arm and the entire clubshaft and clubhead. As you can see in any swing sequence and as I mentioned in my previous post- the left shoulder is moving up in relation to the ground- when the hands are say hip high on the downswing. So while the left shoulder is moving up- parts of the lever assembly are still moving down. C) So in the rotating system where you have two "levers" - the shoulder line and the primary lever assembly line - like the "7". Then during the downswing- you have a situation where the corner of the "7" i.e. the left shoulder is at some point (say when hands get hip high on the downswing) are going to be moving up in relation to the ground WHILE the bottom of the "7" i.e. the clubhead is still going to be moving down in relation to the ground. That specific issue has been my whole point all along- that just because the left shoulder is moving up in relation to the ground "at any point in the swing" doesn't necessarily mean that the clubhead is moving up in relation to the ground. Matthew- also realize the limitations to my "whole point" - I'm not saying that you might be correct or might be wrong in regards to the location of lowpoint slightly back of the left shoulder etc. Of course, I'd need it defined and explained so I could understand why (I know you said you might do some graphics or something and sometime down the road would be great- not pushing you on that). What I have been disagreeing with is the concept as you presented it - that since the left shoulder is rising up in relation to the ground that therefore the clubhead would be rising up in relation to the ground. My point is that is not necessarily so- as I hope my example points out. Now, that you and I have practically evacuated the forum with this thread :) - It's nice to know we have that kind of power Matthew!:) I'm hoping for two things- 1) you can clearly address my statements above and show where you agree and where you don't and why. 2) That someone else might chime in and either say "Hey, Mike I don't understand your explanation either in regards to this particular issue" or "Hey, Mike I understand what you are saying and clearly see your point". At least a comment from one or two "outside" parties might help you or me- start to better explain or understand our issues. Thanks Matthew! |
Quote:
A) You got it - in the regard that you are visualizing the center of the shoulders i.e. the neck/head staying level. B) Where you missed it- is that the primary lever assembly- is not the entire power package and it is not the center of the shoulders i.e. neck/head- but it is the left arm/shoulder and golf club. See if that helps - or see if you and I need to have an on-going simultaneous thread - like the one that I'm having with Matthew. By the way- you are a positive thinker- I like that! OR did they give you back your job on the Ohio Tourism board? "Snowy but warming up" come on Bob! What did it go from -10F to -5 F? That's pathetic!:happy3: |
Okay
Alrighty then.
If the primary lever assembly is left arm and clubshaft, assuming minimal throwaway, the lever is getting considerably longer as it approaches impact as the left wrist uncocks. The distance that the lever is lengthening is larger than the distance the left shoulder is moving upward. Does that sum up your view, Mike? While Matthew must be saying the left shoulder is moving up more than the primary lever assembly is lengthening prior to and through impact? If that is so, would it not be hard to take divots? It was sunny here and a lot of snow melted today.....temps in the 40° range forecasted tomorrow! We'll be teeing it up here in no time! UPP in snowy Ohio |
Mikey,
You see that ballgame today! Man! Kobe was incredible- Holla Back! |
Quote:
I'm glad you posted that. No, I'm not including the left wrist at all in the equation at this point- just to keep things simple. Does it have some affect- sure but let's agree that as Matthew says it's minimal- in fact- don't even include it in the equation. I'm saying that the number 7 is the representation of the shoulder line - and the primary lever /, looking face on to a player- say at impact fix. So, we are looking at the primary lever as if it was one single piece - one 2x4. Now, per one of my previous posts- you took the pencil lead and put it between the "shoulders" i.e. in the middle of the top line of the 7 and then rotated it- the corner of the 7 where they both meet represents the golfer's lead shoulder at address- from the face on view. The slanting leg of the 7 represents the primary lever - from the face on view. Now, like the golfer swinging - the left shoulder of the 7 moves up but the end of the primary lever system i.e. clubhead does not begin to move up until it passes where- ever the shoulder is. In fact if you have that pencil lead in the middle of the top line and you rotate the 7 clockwise- like the backswing in a golf swing, you can see that the shoulder goes down- while the clubhead goes up. That's the same thing that I am saying is happening on the downswing- at some point halfway down- the shoulder begins to move up in relation to the ground- as it orbits around it's own circle while the clubhead is still moving down. Here is what started this whole thing- Matthew posted the following: Actually, no it doesn't. This would be true if the left shoulder was stationary, however in the golf stroke the left shoulder is moving in its own little orbit that contains an upwards direction and this brings the low point backwards somewhat. I read that as if Matthew is saying that since the left shoulder is going up that the clubhead must be going up. Maybe I read that wrong and he'll correct me but since I read it that way- I disagreed for obvious reasons stated here and my previous posts. I see the left shoulder starting to move up - when you're hands are say half way down on the down swing. Just so I can hone in on what he is saying I guess I should ask Matthew when does he see the left shoulder moving up? Matthew- where are you? Holla Back! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Please!! No thread jacking!:eyes: |
Quote:
Just because the intersection of the two lines (the lead shoulder in our golfing "machine" example) moves up in relation to the ground- the bottom of the 7 i.e. the clubhead - doesn't necessarily move up. Again, I read Matthew's post to imply that if the left shoulder was moving up that the clubhead would be moving up and obviously the last half of any downswing shows that not to be true. Likewise the backswing shows that there is not a direct correlation between what the shoulder is doing and what the clubhead is doing i.e. the shoulder goes down in relation to the ground and the clubhead is moving up- for say at least the first half of the backswing if not more. Hopefully, with all of my posts- Matthew can come back with where he or/and I miscommunicated, made a mistake, took something out of context, etc. As long as we make headway- I don't care what kind of headway it is! |
Quote:
|
|
Up Close and Personal
Oh my goodness . . .
:confused1 |
Quote:
Apart from on the phone with you, ive never actually verbally put my thoughts across. Im not actually a very good speaker but think I might do more video responces now as would prefer to become better at speaking these things verbally. |
Quote:
Actually Matthew- that was very clear unlike my interpretation of your posts. At least I understand where you are coming from now. Of course, I'll need to take that new information and work with the ramifications and get back to you. A few things before we move on- 1) The video was very clear and makes me want to just ignore any of your posts and start from scratch with the video- although I'll review your posts in light of the video and maybe I'll pick up some new insight. 2) I think we may still have trouble in paradise but how do I pay for or get more video answers!! That should be your modus operandi!! Was that really you or some imposter that made perfect sense! 3) I always like to keep up on technology- not saying I always do but I like to - I have no idea on how to upload video or what software system works easily. I'm going to need to learn that in the next month- I'm sure it's pretty easy- I'll be hitting the electronics store soon. I do think at least for me- that it would have been less painful if at some point you would have said "I agree with the clubhead moving down while the shoulder is moving up"- but here is what I am saying .... in other words - you've got to bridge the gap and not just expect people to get into your world. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
I just watched the video for the 2nd time- starting off with "My, My"- you're killing me:laughing9 "Love that video!" Actually, I need a day or so to A) let some ideas simmer and B) give you a rest - I don't want to drive you away!! Too much fun.
Still might need some help on the last portion of the video and your original post. Can you video up an elaboration on why or what factors might influence low point being slightly before the left shoulder? Either way - I need to chew on this for a little bit for both reasons listed above. |
Quote:
|
Matthew,
Below are the only two items in your post that I wanted to clarify. Quote:
|
|
Quote:
Makes perfect sense to me . . . I just want to clarify . . . my initial question was infact directed to Mikey. I'm not sure that I needed "correction" I was just asking Mikey some stupid questions to see if I could make him have a nutball fit. It worked with all that "you got a 7 and and you turn it into an airplane and fly it across the world . . . " But I'll stand corrected if need be. |
Matthew,
I had to revise this post and it wouldn't take the "save" - so I've deleted it and you can find my post below. |
Revised- use this one.
Matthew, (I've revised this one- made a few changes for clarification)
Now that I understand your perspective- I can see why you say low point of the overall orbit would/could be before the point that the clubhead passes the "in-line" location of the lead shoulder. So before I break it out a little further - and maybe take away a little of your original post- Let me say that you are correct and that I think it is an excellent understanding of what is happening in the full swing. Nice job! Let's see how much of this post- that we can agree on- I'm hoping quite a bit if I understand the concept as you. First I'd like to correct an error in my thinking in regards to my "7" "simple machine" example. My "7" example was a one center rotation machine. It only rotated about the "neck" of the golfer and therefore I only had a center of rotation at the top left of the 7. All of that wasn't a problem as I was just trying isolate the low point concept with something that A) resembled the shoulder line and the primary lever line, and B) wasn't just a straight up and down pendulum. The error that I made was thinking that 7 would have a low point opposite the top right of the 7 whenever the bottom of the 7 passed beneath it. In fact, the low point for any single fixed center of rotation is directly beneath it- regardless of the fixed shape of the attachment. So that just gets me corrected- not saying you even commented on my machine or even considered it in your explanation. Let me repeat that in a system where there is just one center- the low point of the fixed length rotating body will always be underneath the center of the rotation. As you pointed out- if the left shoulder doesn't move and the primary lever system would rotate around it - low point would be opposite the left shoulder. Likewise, for single center rotating machines- say in golf if the primary lever system was fixed and did not rotate around the left shoulder- then if you just rotate around the "neck" i.e. the pivot- the low point would be opposite the neck i.e. say a shot chip shot or something- or a putting stroke. Using this principle- In general, I'd say that if you set-up to any full golf shot- with the ball located perpendicular to the inside of your lead foot (Golfing Machine you'd relate it to "lowpoint" i.e. upperbody - so just ahead of your lead "nipple" (that's for you Bucket) - then you couldn't have a "one piece takeaway" since lowpoint would be opposite the neck/belly button- you'd need to have the clubhead dig a trough into the ground! Matthew- As opposed to my simple machine - your machine has two centers of rotation. One lever pivoting around the "neck" and one lever pivoting around the "left shoulder". So while we consider the first center of rotation fixed in space- the "neck", the second center - the left shoulder- is moving in space- it is orbiting the fixed center "the neck"- and while that center is orbiting the neck it has a lever rotating around it- the primary lever assembly. Again, not to take away anything from your post but to just look at this concept of dual rotating centers/levers where one center is rotating on the orbit of another -on paper- here is how I follow the logic. First, the two centers of rotation combine to form a "clubhead" orbit- that neither center could create on it's own. It's that orbit of the clubhead and that orbits lowpoint that we are comparing to the axis of rotation of the 2nd (moving center) (the left shoulder in our golf example). The fact that the center of the axis of rotation (the 2nd center) that is moving around the fixed center is moving up- doesn't mean in all situations that low point of the overall orbit will be behind the axis of rotation of the moving center. In your example I believe you said at one point in the video "when the up overcomes the down" which maybe is your way of describing what I'm going to cover below. In principle, I see it as if the up of the end of the 1st lever (left shoulder in your example) rises more than the down ward motion of the end of the 2nd lever-(the clubhead in your example)- then you'd have that condition where the overall lowpoint would be behind the lowpoint of just the 2nd lever. To show the logic behind dual centers of rotation when one is fixed and the other center is rotating around it- let's consider the hands as rotating in the golf swing on a fixed center point (say the head/neck) moving in a perfect circle (not saying they do) and the clubshaft rotates around the hands- so the hands are the 2nd center and that center is moving while the clubshaft is also moving around the hands center (say during the release in the downswing). If the shaft moves around the hands at a high rate of degrees per second while the hands are moving at a slow rate around their fixed center (say the head) - then the low point of the clubhead on the overall orbit might be descending after the point that the clubhead passes the 2nd center of rotation. So even though the clubhead has passed the hands - you could be still having the clubhead descending. That's just an example showing a "combined center lowpoint" that is after the point that the clubhead passes under the moving center of rotation i.e. the opposite of your example. In summary, it's not so much if the 2nd center is rising that completely determines if the low point of the orbit created by the dual centers is before the center of rotation of the 2nd center (left shoulder in your example) but it's the correlation between the angular speed of the first center in relation to the 2nd centers angular speed - combined with where the individual levers are in their rotations. Here are two points in case I've said something that's going to make your start firing bullets: 1) I'm not expecting but hoping that if we are on the same line of thinking that you'll follow my logic. Again, if you were strictly referring to the full golf swing then all you might have needed to cover is exactly what you did cover- however, my mind was looking at the principle involved and having a tough time accepting it (if the shoulder was moving up then the low point would be before the left shoulder)- based on what I described above. 2) I may indeed not have this correct or there may be additional issue of relationships of radius size, speed of rotations etc. but I look forward to your thoughts. And I'm not saying you didn't know any of this or that I'm disagreeing - I'm just putting my thoughts down on the possibilities and seeing if you agree or disagree. Thanks, Mike |
In this model of a golfer, surely there are three axis points - i) the shoulders are rotating around the spine fulcrum point; ii) the left arm is rotating around the left shoulder socket fulcrum point; and iii) the clubshaft is rotating around the left hand/wrist fulcrum point.
As Matthew has correctly stated, the left shoulder point fulcrum point is moving upwards in the peri-impact zone and this moves the left hand/wrist fulcrum point upwards to an equal degree. While this is happening, the clubshaft is descending to the low point of its arc (relative to the left wrist/hand fulcrum point) and the low point depends on where the clubhead is in space at the time point of impact and the time point of the deepest divot depth (low point of the entire system). However, there is a third compounding factor - the movement of the spine fulcrum point upwards and rightwards as the golfer stands-up through impact. Surely, that must affect the low point of the entire three fulcrum point system because movement of the spine affects the position of the left shoulder? Jeff. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Feel free to post but I'm waiting for Matthew to respond to my post and closing out our conversation. Surely, there are many other centers - and they may or may not affect the overall lowpoint of the system but I believe for now that Mathew and I are limiting the discussion to a "two center system" in order to understand the principle at hand. Thanks |
Mike - my question is not intended to intrude in your discussion with Matthew regarding a "two center system". I am just trying to understand all the factors that could affect the position of the low point. Hopefully, Matthew can address the question whether other factors significantly affect the position of the low point. One factor would be the degree of "standing up" at impact and also the degree of secondary axis tilt. Another potential factor would be the degree of left-lateral hip slide that occurs during the downswing. I noted that the outer border of Ben Hogan's left pelvis is well within the outer border of his left foot at impact when hitting a driver, while other golfers have the outer border of their left pelvis slightly outside the outer border of the left foot at impact. It would seem to me that variations in the position of the pelvis at impact (degree of left-lateral slide and/or degree of hip openess at impact) must affect the position of the lumbar spine, and therefore the upper spine, and subsequently the left shoulder socket at the time-point when the clubhead reaches its low point.
Jeff. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:49 AM. |
