Of course you all know what that was. It's the trebuchet, certainly. It was know to throw a 90 Kg projectile a full 1000 yards. There is a recurring joke about that on Reddit. But it's true! It ruled the siege weapon world until gun powder came along.
But what has this to do with the golf swing?
Actually the trebuchet uses a golf swing. There is a bucket full of stones and it pulls down on the short end of a long lever, which then pulls on a sling with the projectile on it.
The sling is flexible and this engine is quite efficient in what it does.
The golf swig is basically the same. We have some muscles pulling the shoulders and arms around and eventually the club comes around and is delivered to the ball.
Note that there is no attempt to help the club into the ball. Nor to move the arms away from the body. All of that will happen as the torso twists. It's the same as water coming off of a spinning bike tire or the movement of your body in a car going around a corner.
Another way to think of this is that we want to emulate a skater who is spinning. They are usually interested in bringing their arms to their body to speed up the spin. We reverse this process to speed up the arms and slow the body. But it's the same physics.
Using this as a model for the swing allows you to do very little. You have to fold the arms to the chest, and you want to cock the wrists to make our fly wheel as compact as possible. The longer the shoulder turn, the more time you have to spin them up to speed.
The unwinding is done by the spinning of the torso which will move all the goodies to their proper positions without anymore effort. The timing is automatic. I don't know why the timing works to perfection, but it does. I asked the physicist why the timing worked out. If I remember correctly he had no answer.
If you want more speed, then you can delay the club's release with some wrist effort that will cause to move faster later. But don't try to flip the wrists at the ball. (It is theoretically possible to add some speed doing this, but you need very fast wrists and very precise timing. Miss the timing and you will slow things down.)
This automatic arm/wrist movement is not common to a number of sports. Tennis and baseball require the very hand action that you don't want in the golf swing.
My sports background contains both these sports. I think I've been trying to use some of these old habits in my golf swing.
But today, I was concentrating on not doing any of that. Wind up and then spin and let it all work itself out.
I played quite well. My irons have become longer, my driver has come along too. It's all good. I'm back the putting game as an area of concern.
There is a lot more information at tutelman.com, where I gleaned all of this knowledge. Dave Tutelman has a nice golf section on his site and I've found he is more than willing to answer questions by email. Highly recommended for reading.
If you want to see a trebuchet in action, they are still in use today in the Pumpkin Chucking contests. I would refer you to YouTube for some action videos on that.
Friday, April 20, 2018
Monday, April 16, 2018
Reminded Me of The Gog Magog
It was a dark and stormy round... Got rained on three times and hailed on once.
Not sure I've putted through hail before. It didn't last long.
It was cool too and the wind was light about 5 mph. The sun came out for a few minutes. "Is that my shadow I see?" ask Rich II.
It was, but it didn't last.
Rich II forwent the traditional hotdog as he was soaked and just wanted to get home and get dry.
I think we were the only groups on the course.
I was trying the new putting routine and trying to swing the club and let my hands free wheel through the swing.
The long game was fine and quite fine in parts, but the putting was an adventure. I was hitting it pretty firmly and my lines were not that good. It seemed that a lot of putts became quite straight as I was deliberately upping my speeds.
I'm not convinced either way on the putting. I like some of parts, it seems simpler, but I was putting pretty well before I started on this.
I hit some wonderful little delicate pitches allowing my hands to slide into the ball without direction. I did have some problems hitting a couple of sand shots, they came out short of what I wanted. The sand was wet and compact, but I'm not convinced that was the issue. Maybe hitting the sand a bit too early.
More golf tomorrow and hopefully it will be warmer and drier.
I see that I've not explained the title of the post. The Gog Magog golf course is in Cambridge, England, where David is a member. I got to play it a couple of times when we visited. The rains would come through and soak us for 3 minutes, disappear for 30 and then try again. Gear on, gear off. I nice memory, but it would have been better in the dry!
Not sure I've putted through hail before. It didn't last long.
It was cool too and the wind was light about 5 mph. The sun came out for a few minutes. "Is that my shadow I see?" ask Rich II.
It was, but it didn't last.
Rich II forwent the traditional hotdog as he was soaked and just wanted to get home and get dry.
I think we were the only groups on the course.
I was trying the new putting routine and trying to swing the club and let my hands free wheel through the swing.
The long game was fine and quite fine in parts, but the putting was an adventure. I was hitting it pretty firmly and my lines were not that good. It seemed that a lot of putts became quite straight as I was deliberately upping my speeds.
I'm not convinced either way on the putting. I like some of parts, it seems simpler, but I was putting pretty well before I started on this.
I hit some wonderful little delicate pitches allowing my hands to slide into the ball without direction. I did have some problems hitting a couple of sand shots, they came out short of what I wanted. The sand was wet and compact, but I'm not convinced that was the issue. Maybe hitting the sand a bit too early.
More golf tomorrow and hopefully it will be warmer and drier.
I see that I've not explained the title of the post. The Gog Magog golf course is in Cambridge, England, where David is a member. I got to play it a couple of times when we visited. The rains would come through and soak us for 3 minutes, disappear for 30 and then try again. Gear on, gear off. I nice memory, but it would have been better in the dry!
Sunday, April 15, 2018
More Putting Thoughts
My most loyal reader requested a new post and I have a couple of things to say, though, as you will find out, not as much as I wanted.
There is only one type of putt. You have speed and direction to judge. If the putt has no break, then the direction is 0! Or we might want to call it a vector, because we want to add vectors if we have multiple breaks on a putt.
I mentioned in a prior post that putting ought to be trivial as the club ball interaction is static. We are not trying to hit up nor down on the ball, nor will we try to curve the ball. I've heard that Bobby Locke, from South Africa, was reported to be one of the best putters of all time, and liked to hook his putts! I guess it can be done and one might want to consider use of a axis tilt to mitigate directional vectors. But we can save that for another time.
So we have two problems, adding the directional vectors to arrive at a putting line and then with that line in mind decide on a ball speed.
Then we line up to the putting line and wack the ball to get it up to speed. Then we are done and wait for the envious remarks, stares, or grudging, or genuinely admirational remarks from our playing companions.
I've been told that it doesn't always go that way. Let us look into this a bit further, though I would suggest that the method described above is accurate and useful. One might decide on speed first and then plan a line to match. I wouldn't object to that and as we discuss further, I might even approve of that approach.
If we decide on speed first, how far do we want to hit the ball? The rule of thumb is 17 inches past the hole. This has been determined by Dave Pelz experimentally. And you will find it in The Physics of Golf , by Jorgensen. Jorgensen was astounded that Pelz came up the "correct" number even though he didn't use a model! Models are an interesting topic, and the old joke is that "All models are wrong, but some are useful." Jorgensen's implied amazement is sad in a way. At my old place of work they wrote a paper and sent it out for publication. During the peer review one reviewer commented that he'd like to see a model instead of the actual, empirical data! A sad state of science affairs!
Ok, we have a couple of folks who would suggest that 17 inches past the hole would be the best speed. So fast putts and slow putts will require differing forces for the same length putt.
Finally, I come to the question in which I am currently interested and I must report my father let me down on this one. It seems to me, due to my modest data collections that people putting and chipping and pitching are deathly afraid of being long or knocking the ball past the hole. This frequently results in some muffed or bladed ball or short putt as the mind kicks in during execution and alters the stroke to handle this fear. On a pitch or chip that can cause the club to flip and then you get fat or thin shots, neither of which are useful.
I passed this on my dad, a psychologist before retirement. Sadly his remark was that this might be due to habits. I was hoping for a bit ore depth on that question. Now as I type this, I can't discount that, but I don't think it's true. There seems to be a deep seated fear. I was thinking more along fear of failure or of success, but that doesn't fit either.
If you have seen the ball roll past the hole you have a very good idea of what the ball will do going back the same path (or close to it). And when we add in less break with more speed, we should be eager to give the ball a goodly wack.
You're going to gain in a couple of ways: making more putts by not leaving anything short and then less break and easier putting coming back. What is not to like? And I would answer that with the observation of the fear factor in these delicate shots.
A lot of putting instruction tries to take the hands out of the putting stroke, firm it all up and rock the shoulders! Use large muscles, they are better at handling tension! Stuff like is common. Which seems to acknowledge the tendency to come up short and is fear driven. Tension being the symptom of the inner fear?
So as a better approach to all of this, I would suggest the following:
The above rules are new to me. Though I have played a round or two where my goal was to make sure every putt went past the hole. That seemed to help with the being short or afraid all the time.
I'm off to play tomorrow. I'll give this a try and pay attention to my inner fearful dialog.
I played a few times last week. I've not been feeling well and took more time off than I usually do. But I had a solid 76 on Thursday. It was one of those magic days where the pace and weather and company were in harmony. There is a penalty stroke in there, but 14 putts on the front nine and no three putts for the round.
The Friday round had some solid play, but the putts didn't go down and I felt rushed a lot of the day. So the scoring wasn't as good then, then, worst of all, the Costco hot dog upset my stomach! What was that all about? But as mentioned, I'm feeling better and have hopes for my usual cast, well seasoned, iron stomach.
There is only one type of putt. You have speed and direction to judge. If the putt has no break, then the direction is 0! Or we might want to call it a vector, because we want to add vectors if we have multiple breaks on a putt.
I mentioned in a prior post that putting ought to be trivial as the club ball interaction is static. We are not trying to hit up nor down on the ball, nor will we try to curve the ball. I've heard that Bobby Locke, from South Africa, was reported to be one of the best putters of all time, and liked to hook his putts! I guess it can be done and one might want to consider use of a axis tilt to mitigate directional vectors. But we can save that for another time.
So we have two problems, adding the directional vectors to arrive at a putting line and then with that line in mind decide on a ball speed.
Then we line up to the putting line and wack the ball to get it up to speed. Then we are done and wait for the envious remarks, stares, or grudging, or genuinely admirational remarks from our playing companions.
I've been told that it doesn't always go that way. Let us look into this a bit further, though I would suggest that the method described above is accurate and useful. One might decide on speed first and then plan a line to match. I wouldn't object to that and as we discuss further, I might even approve of that approach.
If we decide on speed first, how far do we want to hit the ball? The rule of thumb is 17 inches past the hole. This has been determined by Dave Pelz experimentally. And you will find it in The Physics of Golf , by Jorgensen. Jorgensen was astounded that Pelz came up the "correct" number even though he didn't use a model! Models are an interesting topic, and the old joke is that "All models are wrong, but some are useful." Jorgensen's implied amazement is sad in a way. At my old place of work they wrote a paper and sent it out for publication. During the peer review one reviewer commented that he'd like to see a model instead of the actual, empirical data! A sad state of science affairs!
Ok, we have a couple of folks who would suggest that 17 inches past the hole would be the best speed. So fast putts and slow putts will require differing forces for the same length putt.
Finally, I come to the question in which I am currently interested and I must report my father let me down on this one. It seems to me, due to my modest data collections that people putting and chipping and pitching are deathly afraid of being long or knocking the ball past the hole. This frequently results in some muffed or bladed ball or short putt as the mind kicks in during execution and alters the stroke to handle this fear. On a pitch or chip that can cause the club to flip and then you get fat or thin shots, neither of which are useful.
I passed this on my dad, a psychologist before retirement. Sadly his remark was that this might be due to habits. I was hoping for a bit ore depth on that question. Now as I type this, I can't discount that, but I don't think it's true. There seems to be a deep seated fear. I was thinking more along fear of failure or of success, but that doesn't fit either.
If you have seen the ball roll past the hole you have a very good idea of what the ball will do going back the same path (or close to it). And when we add in less break with more speed, we should be eager to give the ball a goodly wack.
You're going to gain in a couple of ways: making more putts by not leaving anything short and then less break and easier putting coming back. What is not to like? And I would answer that with the observation of the fear factor in these delicate shots.
A lot of putting instruction tries to take the hands out of the putting stroke, firm it all up and rock the shoulders! Use large muscles, they are better at handling tension! Stuff like is common. Which seems to acknowledge the tendency to come up short and is fear driven. Tension being the symptom of the inner fear?
So as a better approach to all of this, I would suggest the following:
- Be aggressive about getting the ball beyond the hole - either chipping or putting
- Use your hands if you are comfortable - but to take the tension out of it, I think a long smooth swing is a good approach.
- Decide on speed, then calculate line keeping in mind that there will be less break with more speed.
- Rear back and wack it. Monika Sorenstam has been quoted: "I never worried about the next putt!" Yes, pay attention and hit this one with excitement and solidity!
The above rules are new to me. Though I have played a round or two where my goal was to make sure every putt went past the hole. That seemed to help with the being short or afraid all the time.
I'm off to play tomorrow. I'll give this a try and pay attention to my inner fearful dialog.
I played a few times last week. I've not been feeling well and took more time off than I usually do. But I had a solid 76 on Thursday. It was one of those magic days where the pace and weather and company were in harmony. There is a penalty stroke in there, but 14 putts on the front nine and no three putts for the round.
The Friday round had some solid play, but the putts didn't go down and I felt rushed a lot of the day. So the scoring wasn't as good then, then, worst of all, the Costco hot dog upset my stomach! What was that all about? But as mentioned, I'm feeling better and have hopes for my usual cast, well seasoned, iron stomach.
Wednesday, April 11, 2018
Couple of Stray Thoughts
I've been under the weather a couple of days and even walked off the course after 9. I didn't stop at Costco and have a hot dog or yogurt!
I was talking to my buds today and one of the others got sick too.
My big fear is that the water coolers on the course are contaminated! I don't think they are, but what a disaster that would be.
Jay and I played at a course in North Carolina and they had no water on the course. It's hot there. We were told some guy sued for waterborne illness and the course said, ok, no more water. Die from dehydration either way, I guess. We needed to stop at Walmart for a case of water bottles and tossed them in the back of the car then cart. What a pain.
Thought II: ran across a video that made the point that we overly complicate golf and golf instruction. His evidence for this was that a golf club in the only tool we give to someone and then tell them how to hold it and where their right elbow should go and how much hip turn is needed.
Better might be: take this and hit that.
I was talking to my buds today and one of the others got sick too.
My big fear is that the water coolers on the course are contaminated! I don't think they are, but what a disaster that would be.
Jay and I played at a course in North Carolina and they had no water on the course. It's hot there. We were told some guy sued for waterborne illness and the course said, ok, no more water. Die from dehydration either way, I guess. We needed to stop at Walmart for a case of water bottles and tossed them in the back of the car then cart. What a pain.
Thought II: ran across a video that made the point that we overly complicate golf and golf instruction. His evidence for this was that a golf club in the only tool we give to someone and then tell them how to hold it and where their right elbow should go and how much hip turn is needed.
Better might be: take this and hit that.
Sunday, April 8, 2018
Another Masters and More Ways to Watch (No spoilers!)
No spoilers from me! But it was quite interesting from my point of view and a number of really good rounds were shot.
I just wanted to mention that Masters.com provided some wonderful extra coverage. I was streaming it while watching the main show on the TV.
They had a video channel called "Featured Groups" which covered all of Tiger's third round and most of his fourth round. That coverage was not shown on the main show.
They also showed Amen Corner where they showed all the groups going through 11, 12, and 13.
These coverages were commercial free and had different color and regular commentary. I've grown to hate Jim Nance as I did Brent Musberger and any coverage that does not include these clowns goes up in my humble estimation.
The only thing I didn't like was the inability to move back and forth in the stream. You could go back to the beginning, but couldn't move forwards even if the stream had advanced past you current position. When you join the stream, you engage at the current position. Any backwards movement throws you back to the beginning. Also the featured groups was shut down when the main show started on Saturday. This didn't seem to happen on Sunday.
So for next year, if you want to see more golf check the video channels out. More interesting than the stuff on the golf channel.
They begin earlier than the network coverage, too, which can make for a long couple of days in the TV chair.
I just wanted to mention that Masters.com provided some wonderful extra coverage. I was streaming it while watching the main show on the TV.
They had a video channel called "Featured Groups" which covered all of Tiger's third round and most of his fourth round. That coverage was not shown on the main show.
They also showed Amen Corner where they showed all the groups going through 11, 12, and 13.
These coverages were commercial free and had different color and regular commentary. I've grown to hate Jim Nance as I did Brent Musberger and any coverage that does not include these clowns goes up in my humble estimation.
The only thing I didn't like was the inability to move back and forth in the stream. You could go back to the beginning, but couldn't move forwards even if the stream had advanced past you current position. When you join the stream, you engage at the current position. Any backwards movement throws you back to the beginning. Also the featured groups was shut down when the main show started on Saturday. This didn't seem to happen on Sunday.
So for next year, if you want to see more golf check the video channels out. More interesting than the stuff on the golf channel.
They begin earlier than the network coverage, too, which can make for a long couple of days in the TV chair.
Saturday, April 7, 2018
Is it all in the Hands?
One of my continuous themes in this blog is my trials with the big stick.
I've often thought that if I could hit the driver like I do the sand wedge I would have been on tour long ago.
I ran across a rule of thumb that suggested you should hit your driver twice the length of your nine iron. Well, I would be very happy with 260 off the tee.
All of this brings us to the new topic. Rich II, whom you may remember from a prior post, lent me feedback tool called Tour Striker. The Tour Striker (TS) is not an unusual device. It connects to the end of a grip and there are plastic bits that will press against your arm and it you swing properly, they will continue to press against your arm.
I have another example of this called the Tour Angle 144. This is basically the same thing, but you grip it under your fingers on a club and then have a piece that bumps the arm.
Then there is Greg Norman's "The Thing." Someone wanted to borrow it and it's been in the trunk of the car for a couple of years. I can't remember who asked.
The idea here is that you are not manipulating the wrists much whilst swinging. Doing so upsets the club face contact angles and leads to other issues like slowing down the arms to make it all work.
I like these devices and think they have merit. Sadly, I've not bothered using them enough to fix my many errors. Well, I must have at least one. I've found over the years that I cannot use an interlocking grip. This symptom leads me to suspect that my hands do not work together. Working together is a classical theme that runs through most golf instruction.
I also have some callouses in the "wrong" place that also hint at this action. No pro that I've ever worked with has mentioned this. Some high speed camera work might help. Also why is there not a grip with pressure sensors in it that would send data to a cell phone during the swing? A project waiting to be made...
My club striking efficiency decreases with the longer the club, id est, I'm much longer with a 9 iron than a 7 iron proportionately.
I've noted my "helping" the longer clubs with my hands.
To fix this I'm going to try to use an interlocking grip. I'm sure I can do this at low speed. At high speed it'll work or I'll break some fingers. I think there will be an element of trust that I'll have to dig within to find and allow the proper things to happen.
It may be that all of this will fix my use of the wrists, a good thing, but may just lead me to the next flaw in the swing. But I have to think that this is a step in the proper direction. Just the saving on tape I use to cover callouses will be worth it.
Once again I must thank Rich II for his inspiration. Just having the tool by my chair has led to a new action plan -- and what is more valuable than that?
I've often thought that if I could hit the driver like I do the sand wedge I would have been on tour long ago.
I ran across a rule of thumb that suggested you should hit your driver twice the length of your nine iron. Well, I would be very happy with 260 off the tee.
All of this brings us to the new topic. Rich II, whom you may remember from a prior post, lent me feedback tool called Tour Striker. The Tour Striker (TS) is not an unusual device. It connects to the end of a grip and there are plastic bits that will press against your arm and it you swing properly, they will continue to press against your arm.
I have another example of this called the Tour Angle 144. This is basically the same thing, but you grip it under your fingers on a club and then have a piece that bumps the arm.
Then there is Greg Norman's "The Thing." Someone wanted to borrow it and it's been in the trunk of the car for a couple of years. I can't remember who asked.
The idea here is that you are not manipulating the wrists much whilst swinging. Doing so upsets the club face contact angles and leads to other issues like slowing down the arms to make it all work.
I like these devices and think they have merit. Sadly, I've not bothered using them enough to fix my many errors. Well, I must have at least one. I've found over the years that I cannot use an interlocking grip. This symptom leads me to suspect that my hands do not work together. Working together is a classical theme that runs through most golf instruction.
I also have some callouses in the "wrong" place that also hint at this action. No pro that I've ever worked with has mentioned this. Some high speed camera work might help. Also why is there not a grip with pressure sensors in it that would send data to a cell phone during the swing? A project waiting to be made...
My club striking efficiency decreases with the longer the club, id est, I'm much longer with a 9 iron than a 7 iron proportionately.
I've noted my "helping" the longer clubs with my hands.
To fix this I'm going to try to use an interlocking grip. I'm sure I can do this at low speed. At high speed it'll work or I'll break some fingers. I think there will be an element of trust that I'll have to dig within to find and allow the proper things to happen.
It may be that all of this will fix my use of the wrists, a good thing, but may just lead me to the next flaw in the swing. But I have to think that this is a step in the proper direction. Just the saving on tape I use to cover callouses will be worth it.
Once again I must thank Rich II for his inspiration. Just having the tool by my chair has led to a new action plan -- and what is more valuable than that?
Wednesday, April 4, 2018
New Balance Shoes Part III
I know at least one of my dear readers is waiting to see what happened.
Here are the developments:
I got an email yesterday from NB telling me that they got the shoes and that they would require 5 to 10 days to evaluate them. I don't know what that means, perhaps they have a test tank and wanted to see if the shoes really leaked. They also suggested that during this time I might want to spend some time buying a new pair at Newbalance.com! Never miss an opportunity to up sell!
If the tank test is true, then they leaked as fast for them as they did for me.
The shoes were in sad shape and were really beaten up. I didn't abuse them, but played a bunch. I used to have shoes like that as a kid, them mom would grab and toss them into the wash machine and drier. Who can forget the thump of the drier?
The shoes would come out a strange shade of white with ground in dark parts. They looked strange, but probably smelled better than when they went in.
I got another email today! Yipes! Enclosed was a coupon worth $110 on their web site.
I went and ordered another pair of the same style. Does my 2 year warranty start over? New shoes, I would hope so.
With $110 off the sales tax dropped to zero. Shipping was required, so that was $7.95 or so.
Should be here next week!
It would have been nice if they'd pay for all the postage, but I'm not complaining too much. At least they provided full pop on the shoes. I did not spend $110 on them when I bought from Amazon.
Now I have the dilemma of having two pairs of shoes. Do I rotate and hope they last or wear one pair to failure and switch while I go through the return process again? There is more toe room on the one's I ordered than on the ones I bought the other day. I suspect that I'll gravitate back to them.
That's the story of the NB shoes and the water on the course that seems to dissolve them. It might be all the reclaimed water is a bit of a solvent for the NB glues. But that's a topic for another day.
Here are the developments:
I got an email yesterday from NB telling me that they got the shoes and that they would require 5 to 10 days to evaluate them. I don't know what that means, perhaps they have a test tank and wanted to see if the shoes really leaked. They also suggested that during this time I might want to spend some time buying a new pair at Newbalance.com! Never miss an opportunity to up sell!
If the tank test is true, then they leaked as fast for them as they did for me.
The shoes were in sad shape and were really beaten up. I didn't abuse them, but played a bunch. I used to have shoes like that as a kid, them mom would grab and toss them into the wash machine and drier. Who can forget the thump of the drier?
The shoes would come out a strange shade of white with ground in dark parts. They looked strange, but probably smelled better than when they went in.
I got another email today! Yipes! Enclosed was a coupon worth $110 on their web site.
I went and ordered another pair of the same style. Does my 2 year warranty start over? New shoes, I would hope so.
With $110 off the sales tax dropped to zero. Shipping was required, so that was $7.95 or so.
Should be here next week!
It would have been nice if they'd pay for all the postage, but I'm not complaining too much. At least they provided full pop on the shoes. I did not spend $110 on them when I bought from Amazon.
Now I have the dilemma of having two pairs of shoes. Do I rotate and hope they last or wear one pair to failure and switch while I go through the return process again? There is more toe room on the one's I ordered than on the ones I bought the other day. I suspect that I'll gravitate back to them.
That's the story of the NB shoes and the water on the course that seems to dissolve them. It might be all the reclaimed water is a bit of a solvent for the NB glues. But that's a topic for another day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)