I believe that Dr. Jorgensen's work would disagree that hinge action, whether horizontal, angled, or vertical, could have any effect on ballflight with regard to how the face is behaving during the "impact interval' (time the ball is in contact with the face of the club). I don't believe he would agree with the notion that the face is 3 degrees more open at impact than it is at seperation, either; impact doesn't last long enough and the face doesn't rotate fast enough for that to be possible. This is just from what I understand of his research.
I believe that Dr. Jorgensen's work would disagree that hinge action, whether horizontal, angled, or vertical, could have any effect on ballflight with regard to how the face is behaving during the "impact interval' (time the ball is in contact with the face of the club). I don't believe he would agree with the notion that the face is 3 degrees more open at impact than it is at seperation, either; impact doesn't last long enough and the face doesn't rotate fast enough for that to be possible. This is just from what I understand of his research.
That's is what I gathered from reading the stuff as well. Whether he's right is a whole 'nuther story. . . .
I believe that Dr. Jorgensen's work would disagree that hinge action, whether horizontal, angled, or vertical, could have any effect on ballflight with regard to how the face is behaving during the "impact interval' (time the ball is in contact with the face of the club). I don't believe he would agree with the notion that the face is 3 degrees more open at impact than it is at seperation, either; impact doesn't last long enough and the face doesn't rotate fast enough for that to be possible. This is just from what I understand of his research.
Perhaps, but the idea isn't so much the directional influences of the impact interval face angle per se, but the efficient transfer of energy (and that transfers impact on ball flight) per chapter 2 force vectors discussion.
The line of compression being a straight line.
__________________
"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
Doesn't anybody read "Search For The Perfect Swing"? It showed that with good friction during collision, the ball will start in a direction which is 65% of the difference between the clubface angle and the clubhead path, favoring the clubface angle. Reduced friction moves the starting direction closer to the clubface angle. The book debuted in '68, way before "The Physics of Golf", and one year before Homer's. The research findings are all being confirmed present day by TrackMan. I don't think Homer was too pleased that a golf "science" book came out one year before his life's work. I don't beleive that many TGM devotees have studied "Search", but if you want a plethora of good science regarding the impact collision and much else, including biomechanics of the golf swing, then read "Search". It can only aid your understanding of TGM.
I would like to see the results of an accomplished TGM pro (Brian Gay) work through the hinges while on Trackman. This has to have been done already by pros for equipment fitting changes, etc. Would be interesting to get feedback about what the pro thought the hinge did and what Trackman says the result is.
Doesn't anybody read "Search For The Perfect Swing"? It showed that with good friction during collision, the ball will start in a direction which is 65% of the difference between the clubface angle and the clubhead path, favoring the clubface angle. Reduced friction moves the starting direction closer to the clubface angle. The book debuted in '68, way before "The Physics of Golf", and one year before Homer's. The research findings are all being confirmed present day by TrackMan. I don't think Homer was too pleased that a golf "science" book came out one year before his life's work. I don't beleive that many TGM devotees have studied "Search", but if you want a plethora of good science regarding the impact collision and much else, including biomechanics of the golf swing, then read "Search". It can only aid your understanding of TGM.
Thats interesting, Max I'll have to try to get a copy, thanks. Did it talk about an impact interval then as opposed to it being instantaneous?
When you say "65% of the difference between the clubface angle and the path"........are you suggesting that was similar to TGM's at right angles to the leading edge? Leading edge to me implies left to right not up and down. And how would that compare to modern thinking in terms of left to right ? Isnt Trackmans 85% an up and down variance? Not sure, but Id be interested in knowing.
Thats interesting, Max I'll have to try to get a copy, thanks. Did it talk about an impact interval then as opposed to it being instantaneous?
When you say "65% of the difference between the clubface angle and the path"........are you suggesting that was similar to TGM's at right angles to the leading edge? Leading edge to me implies left to right not up and down. And how would that compare to modern thinking in terms of left to right ? Isnt Trackmans 85% an up and down variance? Not sure, but Id be interested in knowing.
Yes, it does talk about an interval and how the club moves about 3/4 inch during that interval. Haven't finished yet but so far is very good.
As far as starting direction, it is 3 dimensional. You can't separate left and right from up and down. It is going to do both. IIRC the 85% number is a 2d representation of a 3d image.
__________________
Make Everything.
Last edited by John Graham : 10-19-2010 at 11:20 AM.
Yes, it does talk about an interval and how the club moves about 3/4 inch during that interval. Haven't finished yet but so far is very good.
As far as starting direction, it is 3 dimensional. You can't separate left and right from up and down. It is going to do both. IIRC the 85% number is a 2d representation of a 3d image.
K, thought Id read somewhere that the 85% was more the launch angle than the "left and right" in my sad terminology. What is "IIRC"?
Thats interesting, Max I'll have to try to get a copy, thanks. Did it talk about an impact interval then as opposed to it being instantaneous?
When you say "65% of the difference between the clubface angle and the path"........are you suggesting that was similar to TGM's at right angles to the leading edge? Leading edge to me implies left to right not up and down. And how would that compare to modern thinking in terms of left to right ? Isnt Trackmans 85% an up and down variance? Not sure, but Id be interested in knowing.
If there is friction between the clubface and ball (and unless you put WD40 on your clubface, there will be), then the ball will start off in a horizontal direction between the horizontal vectors of the "normal" to the clubface and the direction that the clubhead is moving during collision (If they are the same, obviously there is no difference). This frictional element is also the reason that your 56* sand wedge will only launch in the neighborhood of 30*, vertically, which is a percentage of the vertical vector of the "normal" to the clubface and the vertical vector of the direction that the clubhead is moving (Angle of Attack). So the ball launches both vertically and horizontally to a % of the difference between the 2 vectors for each. 85%, favoring the clubface, is an average. The actual % varies with friction and has been identified by TrackMan to be 65-95%, again, always favoring the clubface.
It's all in "Search". I'm still trying to figure out exactly what is in TGM. But I do know that this stuff is not.
Hybrid Mode
