I am aware (thanks to Yoda & co. ) of the two options available. I do not really know what Dr. Zick is claiming. What caught my eye was a certain GSED suggesting that Homer Kelley whiffed. My loyalty is based on correct information...I lack the expertise to reconcile what Manzella is on about. Not looking to throw the cat amongst the pigeons (a 700 year old green guy will do!) They seem to revelling in this information "over there." Cockiness is a trait I hate (in others of course!)
Thanks for yet another frightfully complete explantion. I like delivering my mittens!
I am aware (thanks to Yoda & co. ) of the two options available. I do not really know what Dr. Zick is claiming.
I do not know Dr. Zick nor am I familiar with his arguments. I understand he spoke at the recent TGM Teaching Summit for AIs and presented controversial views. Fine by me.
I do know that most arguments 'against' TGM are specious and simply evaporate when its principles are correctly understood.
Having attended the Summit I can tell you that what Dr Zick showed me was that the ball is struck from the inside but that it is not as much as "some" have been led to believe. It is perhaps a "dimple" or two from the center and not the entire "inside quandrant". This topic has really been made more of than it probably deserves. The real debateble (sic) notion was that horizontal and angled hinge action cause little or no effect on the flight of the ball. I still am not totally sold on that one just yet. The summit was a great time, only around a couple dozen attendees though. I was wishing there would be more to meet.
Having attended the Summit I can tell you that what Dr Zick showed me was that the ball is struck from the inside but that it is not as much as "some" have been led to believe. It is perhaps a "dimple" or two from the center and not the entire "inside quandrant". This topic has really been made more of than it probably deserves. The real debateble (sic) notion was that horizontal and angled hinge action cause little or no effect on the flight of the ball. I still am not totally sold on that one just yet. The summit was a great time, only around a couple dozen attendees though. I was wishing there would be more to meet.
The effect of the hinging has a direct relationship to how fast the door is closing.
The faster the hinging motion, the more spin is applied to the ball. For example, the faster, or further, preferably both, the club face moves counter clockwise around the ball between impact and separation the more hinging effect, will result.
Not according to the man with the phD. Given the animated pictures he showed us the two do not differ enough considering the short amount of time the club is in contact to make that substancial a difference. It was the kind of physics stuff that makes my head spin. The Dr. also didn't think the term "scattered vectors" was appropriate terminology in "physics" talk. He and Mr. Doyle had a conversation about that topic........interesting summit to say the least...hope more of you can attend next time
Not the man with the phD. Given the animated pictures he showed us the two do not differ enough considering the short amount of time the club is in contact to make that substancial a difference.
The effect of the hinging has a direct relationship to how fast the door is closing.
Great, Burner. Really great. Thanks.
To the end of the Follow-Through (Both Arms Straight position), Horizontal Hinging has the greatest Clubhead travel, and Vertical Hinging has the least. So, the essential difference in the Hinge Actions is their Rhythm -- Left Arm and Clubshaft together -- as the Clubhead orbits through Impact.
Actually, the Clubhead Door is always uniformly orbiting (about its Center, the Left Shoulder). It is merely a 'ball of steel' serving the same purpose as David's stone whirling toward Goliath.
It is that pesky Clubface Door that gives us so much trouble. As the Clubhead orbits, the Clubface can Close Only, Lay Back Only or simultaneously Close and Lay Back.
So, there are two Centers (2-D-0):
One for the Clubhead; and
One for the Clubface.
Horizontal and Vertical Hinging permit the Clubhead and Clubface to orbit around the same Center (the Left Shoulder, though in dramatically different ways).
Angled Hinging does not. Hence, it produces its characteristic slicing, uncentered Motion.
If you are having a problem visualizing this concept, rest easy. Even Homer Kelley hit the wall here. Ultimately, he built a model, attempting to determine the Center of the Clubhead Orbit with Angled Hinging. His conclusion:
merry christmas and thank you mr. kelley !!!!!!!!!
Originally Posted by Yoda
Great, Burner. Really great. Thanks.
To the end of the Follow-Through (Both Arms Straight position), Horizontal Hinging has the greatest Clubhead travel, and Vertical Hinging has the least. So, the essential difference in the Hinge Actions is their Rhythm -- Left Arm and Clubshaft together -- as the Clubhead orbits through Impact.
Actually, the Clubhead Door is always uniformly orbiting (about its Center, the Left Shoulder). It is merely a 'ball of steel' serving the same purpose as David's stone whirling toward Goliath.
It is that pesky Clubface Door that gives us so much trouble. As the Clubhead orbits, the Clubface can Close Only, Lay Back Only or simultaneously Close and Lay Back.
So, there are two Centers (2-D-0):
One for the Clubhead; and
One for the Clubface.
Horizontal and Vertical Hinging permit the Clubhead and Clubface to orbit around the same Center (the Left Shoulder, though in dramatically different ways).
Angled Hinging does not. Hence, it produces its characteristic slicing, uncentered Motion.
If you are having a problem visualizing this concept, rest easy. Even Homer Kelley hit the wall here. Ultimately, he built a model, attempting to determine the Center of the Clubhead Orbit with Angled Hinging. His conclusion:
"There is no Center with Angled Hinging."
thanks yoda.
so many of the propositions of the golfing machine have to be understood within context. thus the the criticisms are always specious. it is too hard to understand ,and who wants to devote that much time ! especially when it doesn't work in ones golf swing instantly and simultaneously. inform and instruct AND absorb and apply instantly and simultaneously good luck ?(although instantaneous and simultaneous does immediately help at start up.) "it is a precision system." and "it's continual progress and not instant perfection"(intellectually and physically) . i didn't realize but all of these things are not conducive to instant ego-gratification. 42 years mr. kelley ??? what a tribute !!!!!!!!
i don't know what dr. zick's criticisms of the golfing machine are exactly((the most i have learned is "the inside-aft quadrant" is not right.(rather vague?) it is not clear whether dr. zick thinks mr. kelley is wrong on this point or whether dr. zick has other targets in mind.)) but it APPEARS THE CRITICISM SEEMS TO BE ( i realize this is not strong language but it is all i have so far) that the clubhead (?) moving to the inside aft-quadrant of the ball is too great (again rather vague) .
however mr. kelley writes in 2-j-3 (oh my god not 2-j-3 again !!!) "the 'VISUAL (my emphasis) arc of approach' delivery line is the curved line of angular motion and actually meets the ball on its inside-aft quadrant as it travels DOWN(my emphasis again) to the low point plane line and BACK ACROSS THE IMPACT PLANE LINE AGAIN( and my emphasis again)."
if the clubhead is to stay on plane it obviously cannot hit an extreme inside-aft portion of the ball for the clubhaed to "pass back across the plane line again" .
now it seems as if the interpretation of dr. zick, and i do not want to be unfair to him, is leaving out the downward element of the clubhead orbit. which would also effect the up and in portion of the stroke. in short the crticism seems to be that the stroke is too much in and out on the downstroke. instead of the down and out ,up and in, THREE DIMENSIONAL ON PLANE DOWNSTROKE .
and leaving out the relevant wrist actions and hinge actions along with, and especially the VISUAL equivalents and their relationship to the inclined plane and pressure point #3 and its relation to the inclined plane, without going into the complications of 2-j-3 and hitting (whew !) !!
) They seem to revelling in this information "over there." Cockiness is a trait I hate (in others of course!)
The Dr. also didn't think the term "scattered vectors" was appropriate terminology in "physics" talk. He and Mr. Doyle had a conversation about that topic........interesting summit to say the least...hope more of you can attend next time
Hybrid Mode
