I am intrigued by your work, and without bias or an attitude of confrontation, ask the following questions:
1. At what point -- 100-shooter, 80-shooter, 70-shooter or TOUR pro -- do your quantitative 'physical' measurements (segment speeds, acceleration/deceleration, muscle groups and their 'firing', etc.) add value to the more limited video procedure?
I am a 90 shooter. I think that what Bio trains has value at all levels because he is training the underlying movement patterns that the geometry of the golf swing sits upon. If those patterns are improved we will need less manipulation of the geometry to correct the errors in the physics.
How I think about it is that before Hogan didn't try and create clubhead lag consciously. Rather because he built his downswing from the group up with good movement patterns this created lag. Bio teaches your body how to create force from the ground up and conserve it until you release it into the ball.
Originally Posted by Yoda
2. Assuming the data indicate inefficiencies and the potential for improvement, how do the procedures you recommend differ from that of more conventional instruction?
The exercises I am doing are specifically not intended to be training me in "How to hit the ball". In fact bioengine has reminded me regularly to not try and "do" any of the exercises when I play golf. If I compare these exercises with some of the TGM advice I've received ... let me give you an example. You might say to your student to make a move like skipping a stone. Now the student might be really good at skipping stones or not. The exercise will help, but it is inherently limited by the persons natural ability - or I suppose to be precise I should say natural biomechanics. Bioengine measures and provides a training program that will literally make you a better stone skipper. As you get better at that, and as you allow this improving ability to guide your physics in the golf swing, you will develop a better golf swing.
Originally Posted by Yoda
3. Finally, how do you help your student translate that quantified data/information into its athletic equivalent, i.e., a more efficient golf stroke?
What bioengine provides, or at least the part I have dealt with him, is a personalised training program of Progressing Skills Training that specifically improve your biomechanical weaknesses. In my case some of the exercises look related to golf, but some bear almost no resemblance to a golf action.
I am no expert but the analysis bioengine showed me was understandable (although some of the graphs are pretty intense). And I can see why what I am doing helps. It seems almost too simple sometimes, but I am seeing the results in my ballstriking. So I'm a fan at the moment for sure!
I'm sure bioengine will add a more ocmplete answer, but this is a students perspective.
I think that what Bio trains has value at all levels because he is training the underlying movement patterns that the geometry of the golf swing sits upon.
Thanks Weetbix
Those graphs sound interesting.
Glad to hear that there is some consideration for the Geometry , I wasnt sure whether that was considered "irrelevant" to this course of study or not.
The ball's response reflects the degree to which the golfer complies with the Geometry necessary for the shot at hand, after all. Its not a golf law or TGM law, its just a The Law. Its a round object struck by a lofted implement that is traveling a somewhat circular orbit on an inclined plane, etc etc. There is a lot of Geometry down there in the impact zone that demands precise compliance. As Ben Doyle would say "either its lawful or its awful".
Hybrid Mode
