HAND Path... the key to effortLESS club head speed.

[BerntR]

NMG,

Thanks for the link. Very interesting indeed!

I've read through the whole paper. I didn't digest all of it; it is a hard read. But I got a few things out of it.

From a user perspective, the optimized hub path is very interesting.

Question 1: How to get the hands closer to origo at 9 o'clock? Potential answer: By aggressive weight shift. And more shoulder rotation and delay the extencior action.

Question 2: How to achieve a shorter swing radius / more rotation through impact? (and more thrust?) Potential answer: A stance and impact where the shoulder has rotated further than befare, later release.

We need more of this stuff. The fact that a lot of youngsters appear and seemingly hit the ball a mile with very slim bodies indicates that the current SOTA has headroom with regards to the most efficiant stroke possible.

[EdZ]

The hand path, the hands plane - pp#1 - is very important to understand.

The radius is relative to the 'center' - a perspective which is lacking in most measurements of the swing and not a body part from which to visually measure, but that of the forces involved.

[no_mind_golfer]

NMG,

Thanks for the link. Very interesting indeed!

You're welcome but its Prof Nesbit that deserves all the kudos/thanks. I already emailed him a letter of encourgement knowing that his work would likey be "beyond comprehenssion" of the masses (as exhibited by a few of the posts above).

NMG,
I've read through the whole paper. I didn't digest all of it; it is a hard read. But I got a few things out of it.

From a user perspective, the optimized hub path is very interesting.

Question 1: How to get the hands closer to origo at 9 o'clock? Potential answer: By aggressive weight shift. And more shoulder rotation and delay the extencior action.

Question 2: How to achieve a shorter swing radius / more rotation through impact? (and more thrust?) Potential answer: A stance and impact where the shoulder has rotated further than befare, later release.

We need more of this stuff. The fact that a lot of youngsters appear and seemingly hit the ball a mile with very slim bodies indicates that the current SOTA has headroom with regards to the most efficiant stroke possible.

I agree completely ... we need more of this stuff... basic research on things that benefit the masses as apposed to the few. As a US citizen and tax-payer I am happy to see a pittance of my tax monies go towards these sorts of things (which is in contrast to billions for banksters and the military industrial congressional complex).

“Leadership is unlocking people's potential to become better.”
Bill Bradley

In this life there are leaders and there are followers. There will be the leaders among us that recognize the potential of what is being said here. Think about ... What Nesbit's research is saying is that a scratch golfer can go from hitting his drives 280 yards to 292 and use LESS energy in process (16% less energy!). It also assumes that linear force is his limiting factor. What if linear force is not this scratch golfer's limiting factor? What if the amount of linear force measured during his initial testing could be even greater? That would imply that it is quite possible that MORE... potentially much more than 4% CHS improvement can be had.

Like the Nasa space program... basic research spawns spin-offs (for those who can recognize and seize the opportunity)

There will be leaders that recognize the possibilities presented by Nesbit's research. Those leaders, like you have already done, will begin to imagine ways to improve the golf swings of both themselves and their students utilizing this newfound knowledge. They will be the "TOP 100 " teachers and their students the pga pro's of the future... count on it!

I was down at the range the other day and this young girl and her dad came and set up in the stall next to me. She couldn't have been much more than 12 or 13 but when I heard a woosh out of my left ear as her dad was off getting balls from the machine I began to take notice. Her dad having returned split the bucket between the two of then and she began knocking the heck out of them! I mean here's a young girl probably 100 lbs max (but flexible as a noodle) and she driving 200 yards easily! I though about Nesbit's findings; I wish I had a way to visualize her hand path and confirm my suspicions.

What was really funny was when this girl starts telling her Dad why he's slicing! "Lemme see your grip dad..." "here do it more like this"... " Hey you're right , he says".... "I'm always right Dad.... I've had so many lessons (she says with a smile)" Future LPGAer? I wonder.

[golfbulldog]

NMG, how does your interpretion of Nesbit's work fit in with Homer Kelley's ideas of "straight line delivery path" and "circular delivery path" - Homer was describing curved paths of varying radii along time ago...

[BerntR]

I'm not NMG, but I'll give it a try anyway; My try

First of all, I think the acronym G.O.L.F is telling of Homer's insights in this regard: Geometrically Oriented Linear Force. So obvious he must have understood that linear force was the driving force (as long as it is geometrically correct oriented).

Then I think there are quite a few of the consepts in TGM that fits in - like the different delivery paths and the endless belt effect.

In spite of all the experiments Homer did, I regard his work as theoretical, mechanical and schematic in a clarifying way, and perhaps less empirical and biomechanical oriented compared to this paper. I never quite believed that the straight line delivery path was possible, and here we see an empirical orientet paper that produces something that partly supports the guts of this path, partly presents something that seems more likely to happen in a real stroke.

I am a strong believer in a triangulation approach when it comes to learn & discover. I think reading Nesbit's paper in a TGM frame of reference is much more telling than just reading it on it's own merits. The two shed light on each other.

Nesbit's optimized scratch golfer path is perhaps the optimal path to the subject scratch golfer, but perhaps not the optimal path for any uncompensated stroke. I think this fits well with the guts of TGM.

I am rather convinced that TGM - as any ground breaking work - isn't a complete body of knowledge - and will perhaps never be. And I think empirical, biomechanically and detailed mechanical studies may bring new insights to the table. Some of it will give us better understanding of what Homer really knew and some of it will provide important nuances to the schematics that he provided - and some of it may even be a corrective to some of the current TGM SOTA.

I read somewhere that Einstein deliberately chose to use the terms mass, time and distance in his theory of relativity because "... it would be easier for people to understand the theory then ...". Such a line of reasoning more than indicates that Einstein had an understanding that went much deeper than he was able to put down on paper. I suspect that HK had a similar deep understanding of the golf stroke and that the words in TGM doesn't tell the whole story. And I think we will need his framework forever to put in perspective whatever modern empiric research will reveal.

[mb6606]

NMG, how does your interpretion of Nesbit's work fit in with Homer Kelley's ideas of "straight line delivery path" and "circular delivery path" - Homer was describing curved paths of varying radii along time ago...

Nesbit concludes that a non circular hand path is superior!!!

[Daryl]

Has anyone here studied this research? It's rediculous.

THE ONLY conclusion he can claim is that OTHER Contemporary Researchers who's findings are based on a Constant Radius Clubhead Model are inaccurate.

Duh?

[Daryl]

Nesbit concludes that a non circular hand path is superior!!!

NESBIT CLAIMS that everyone swings with a NON-CIRCULAR HAND PATH.

[mb6606]

Nesbit based his findings on his testing of 4 golfers of different handicaps. To small of a sample to draw any reliable conclusions.

[drulf]

When I try to bring the hands down closer to the torso in the DS, no doubt I´m often 1-2 clubs longer. I have visually more lag angle but feel less lag pressure. #2 is preserved further down as is #1. Surprisingly the lead arm doesn´t look more bent though I of course feel less extensor force. Low point was harder to control. Needs more digging, but very interesting.