There’s lot of talk in golf circles recently about creating ground force and pressure on the club by stamping down and then back with your lead foot through impact. And there’s an idea going around that moving your mass through the ball adds power to the strike. In both cases, folks seem to be pointing towards something other than this being a means to increase clubhead speed — like there is another force beyond speed that increases performance.
My question is, to the extent that clubhead speed is identical, why would adding ground force and body mass behind the club increase ball speed?
Asked a different way, the Iron Byron club testing machine is basically a flywheel to generate speed. Would a 100mph Iron Byron swing hit with the same angle off attack etc. go a different distance than a 100mph swing where a 200lb man was shifting all his weight hard into his lead foot right at impact?
(Slow day at work, yes)
In the 2nd example, your fist has higher linear velocity since your body is moving and your fist is moving (presumably at the same speed as the 1st example).
What hurts more? Getting hit with nerf ball traveling 50mph or medicine ball traveling 50 mph
Makes sense, but would a no weight behind it Iron Byron 100mph impact (or the 100mph impact of a seated trick shot artist) goes as far as a 100mph swing plus 400lbs of ground force at impact? And how would you calculate what the difference would be?
What hurts more? Getting hit with nerf ball traveling 50mph or medicine ball traveling 50 mph
I think in this case it's conservation of momentum or p = mass x veloctiy. And from the OP, it sounds like the velocity is increasing, because the club's mass is (obviously) staying the same.
Otherwise, you are correct. If you could swing a lead club at the same velocity as a typical hollow driver, the ball would go much further.
That’s interesting, but confess I don’t 100% understand.
Quote:
Hit a wall with your fist just using your arm, then hit it while stepping into it with your body. Which hurts more?
Makes sense, but would a no weight behind it Iron Byron 100mph impact (or the 100mph impact of a seated trick shot artist) goes as far as a 100mph swing plus 400lbs of ground force at impact? And how would you calculate what the difference would be?
What is 'ground force'? Equivalent to someone dropping a 400 lb weight next to the tee as you hit the ball? If the two events happen instantaneously, then I don't see how it would help.
Quote:
if you are shifting your body weight, you are adding to the velocity of your swing. Your arms move the club with a velocity of 100 mph relative to your body and your shifting body weight is adding some additional velo (call it 5 mph) on top of that. So the total club velo = 105 mph (relative to a stationary object).
That’s interesting, but confess I don’t 100% understand.
Take an extreme example. You're on a train going 100 mph and coming up to a ball. Your swing is 100 mph. If you're good enough to time it correctly, the velocity of the club when it strikes the ball will be 200 mph.
In your simple case, if you can maintain your 100 mph stroke while also shifting your body weight, the actual club head speed will be >100 mph. The amount over 100 mph depends on how fast you shift your body weight.
Quote:
In comment 15016090 Stan in LA said:
Quote:
Hit a wall with your fist just using your arm, then hit it while stepping into it with your body. Which hurts more?
Makes sense, but would a no weight behind it Iron Byron 100mph impact (or the 100mph impact of a seated trick shot artist) goes as far as a 100mph swing plus 400lbs of ground force at impact? And how would you calculate what the difference would be?
What is 'ground force'? Equivalent to someone dropping a 400 lb weight next to the tee as you hit the ball? If the two events happen instantaneously, then I don't see how it would help.
They test guys swinging with each foot standing on a metal plate that measures how much pressure is applied to the plate. And there is lots of talk about how you want to exert as much pressure on each plate (the rear foot on the backswing, lead foot on the downswing), to generate extra force and presumably more distance.
So I’m just puzzled as to why that’s the case, and whether if clubhead is measured to be identical, why that stamping down feeling increases ball performance.
But assuming you get the exact impact and direction and speed, would the swing of a trick shot artist who is swinging while sitting go as far as a guy whose lead foot at impact shows X amount of pressure?
Quote:
How you are translating the speed/ mass to the ball. You can have all the speed you want but if you can't hit the correct spot on the clubface squarely and moving in the right direction.....
But assuming you get the exact impact and direction and speed, would the swing of a trick shot artist who is swinging while sitting go as far as a guy whose lead foot at impact shows X amount of pressure?
If the angle of attack and velocity are the same...yes.
Baseball players do something similar where they transfer their body weight from their back leg to the front as they swing and the purpose is to aid them in increasing bat speed (velocity).
Quote:
In comment 15016100 giants#1 said:
Quote:
if you are shifting your body weight, you are adding to the velocity of your swing. Your arms move the club with a velocity of 100 mph relative to your body and your shifting body weight is adding some additional velo (call it 5 mph) on top of that. So the total club velo = 105 mph (relative to a stationary object).
That’s interesting, but confess I don’t 100% understand.
Take an extreme example. You're on a train going 100 mph and coming up to a ball. Your swing is 100 mph. If you're good enough to time it correctly, the velocity of the club when it strikes the ball will be 200 mph.
In your simple case, if you can maintain your 100 mph stroke while also shifting your body weight, the actual club head speed will be >100 mph. The amount over 100 mph depends on how fast you shift your body weight.
Club head speed is club head speed. The only difference I can think of is the compression of the ball between the ground and club causing a rebound effect as the ball leaves the club face. The ball is squeezed between the club and ground increasing compression of the core and the kinetic energy stored in the core by the compression. So a teed up ball will not have the same effect.
The way I see the original question, it is not that the weight has anything to do with distance but the fact you have created additional club head speed delivered to the ball as a result of using the ground to generate speed by transferring energy from your legs up from the ground by pushing off of it. If you were standing on a surfboard and swinging, when you started your downswing, the board would slide away from your intended direction of swing(equal and opposite reaction). So even though your arms and torso could generate a certain amount of rotational speed you would lose the the power from your legs, by the the lack of friction that the water generates, or ice. Swing a hockey stick in sneakers at a puck vs swing at the puck in skates. In sneakers you would slip away from the puck; on skates the edges dig in preventing you from slipping.
Just my guess.
That’s what I was thinking. You apply the force as a means to increase velocity. Thanks for spending time on such a ridiculous question lol.
Quote:
In comment 15016108 Jim from Katonah said:
Quote:
In comment 15016100 giants#1 said:
Quote:
if you are shifting your body weight, you are adding to the velocity of your swing. Your arms move the club with a velocity of 100 mph relative to your body and your shifting body weight is adding some additional velo (call it 5 mph) on top of that. So the total club velo = 105 mph (relative to a stationary object).
That’s interesting, but confess I don’t 100% understand.
Take an extreme example. You're on a train going 100 mph and coming up to a ball. Your swing is 100 mph. If you're good enough to time it correctly, the velocity of the club when it strikes the ball will be 200 mph.
In your simple case, if you can maintain your 100 mph stroke while also shifting your body weight, the actual club head speed will be >100 mph. The amount over 100 mph depends on how fast you shift your body weight.
Club head speed is club head speed. The only difference I can think of is the compression of the ball between the ground and club causing a rebound effect as the ball leaves the club face. The ball is squeezed between the club and ground increasing compression of the core and the kinetic energy stored in the core by the compression. So a teed up ball will not have the same effect.
The way I see the original question, it is not that the weight has anything to do with distance but the fact you have created additional club head speed delivered to the ball as a result of using the ground to generate speed by transferring energy from your legs up from the ground by pushing off of it. If you were standing on a surfboard and swinging, when you started your downswing, the board would slide away from your intended direction of swing(equal and opposite reaction). So even though your arms and torso could generate a certain amount of rotational speed you would lose the the power from your legs, by the the lack of friction that the water generates, or ice. Swing a hockey stick in sneakers at a puck vs swing at the puck in skates. In sneakers you would slip away from the puck; on skates the edges dig in preventing you from slipping.
Just my guess.
Thanks, much appreciated!
Link - ( New Window )
Thanks man, I check it out.
Quote:
You are actually pushing up and back through the ground. It’s not just up. Link - ( New Window )
Thanks man, I check it out.
Sasho Mackenzie is one of the most heralded names in the golf industry for his studies of the biomechanics in the golf swing.
I've enjoyed everything I have ever watched/read with him. So much knowledge and he puts everything in terms anyone can understand.
So, any of these swing thoughts are about generating club head speed, striking the ball cleanly, squarely and at the right point in the swing. Where the ball hits the club face and the club design itself determines the efficiency of the energy transfer and how much rotational energy is transferred to the ball.
Also, the properties of the ball matter: construction, cover, etc can affect how much energy is transferred from the club and how much it ultimately spins.
Note: all this assumes the club head is moving inline with the ball and square to the intended flight path. If not, it gets more complicated.
Finally, I am so much better at physics than I am at golf (although my short game has improved this year, making a big scoring difference, which is nice).
So, any of these swing thoughts are about generating club head speed, striking the ball cleanly, squarely and at the right point in the swing. Where the ball hits the club face and the club design itself determines the efficiency of the energy transfer and how much rotational energy is transferred to the ball.
Also, the properties of the ball matter: construction, cover, etc can affect how much energy is transferred from the club and how much it ultimately spins.
Note: all this assumes the club head is moving inline with the ball and square to the intended flight path. If not, it gets more complicated.
Finally, I am so much better at physics than I am at golf (although my short game has improved this year, making a big scoring difference, which is nice).
The best physics advice (and most sought after blue meth) in town lol — thanks!
One thing though, this will undoubtedely lead to back leg injury for a golfer....
Cock your wrist and turn it just prior to contact with the ball
Your club head is already moving with speed but your wrist snapping will add addition MPH
This is the same with hitting a baseball
2. Conservation of momentum. It's just not the mass of the club head that counts, it's the effective mass behind the club head, which determines the energy transferred to the ball.
3. Transfer of centrifugal force. This is a big one. When the body and club are rotating together and then the body stops suddenly and the club head is allowed to "release" away from the body (moving farther away from the body's center of mass) then the club head will accelerate. Using the lead foot to push back not only increases the force into the ball (equal and opposite reaction) but it also slows the body which speeds up the club head. When you throw a frisbee it's the sudden deceleration of the rotation of the body that transfers energy to the frisbee.
Yeah, this. I'm a 1 handicap and have no idea what the OP is talking about. See ball, hit ball.
Quote:
You’re slowing up play!!!
Yeah, this. I'm a 1 handicap and have no idea what the OP is talking about. See ball, hit ball.
Haha, yes, good advice. I’m a mid-to-high single digit these days but now in my early 50s, I’m starting to get some aches and pains and losing some speed. (And even in my younger days I’ve always been a mediocre/poor ball striker with a good short game). I love golf for not just the actual game but the intellectual exercise of understanding the physics of it, and I’m just always curious about what the actual benefit is of applying that compressing, stamping force into my irons, which at least for me, is starting to cause some creakiness in my lead hip and lower back.
Maybe I’ll start a golf thread on best courses we’ve played ... seems to be quite a few BBI golfers lurking.
Quote:
You’re slowing up play!!!
Yeah, this. I'm a 1 handicap and have no idea what the OP is talking about. See ball, hit ball.
As an aside, my father was a poor kid from Western PA who picked up golf while stationed in Key West during WW2. Without any lessons or a ton of time or $, he turned himself into a plus handicap — our house was full of his amateur trophies. He was still shooting his age into his late 70s — just roped draw after roped draw. I’d have these conversations with him, trying to lure him into a technical discussion — I’d say, Dad, what are you trying to do as you begin to swing ... and he’d just say, I try to hit it solid. I could never get him to think or speak technically about the swing, which served him well ... it seems like you have that gift of simplicity too.
If it is something you do not do naturally... then good luck trying to practice that.
There is a reason why there are people who are naturally good at golf, baseball, etc and there are those who can take lessons for 50 years and still will struggle.
If it is something you do not do naturally... then good luck trying to practice that.
There is a reason why there are people who are naturally good at golf, baseball, etc and there are those who can take lessons for 50 years and still will struggle.
Agreed. After playing and practicing for 30 years, my mid-iron play still sucks, and my long-iron play is non-existent (I’ve switched to hybrids). At the same time, I have always had a short game knack ... I can get up and down from a garbage can. Not sure if that dichotomy is ever going to change — but I admire real ballstrikers who seemingly don’t need to think, they just do.
Quote:
In comment 15016309 GiantGolfer said:
Quote:
You’re slowing up play!!!
Yeah, this. I'm a 1 handicap and have no idea what the OP is talking about. See ball, hit ball.
As an aside, my father was a poor kid from Western PA who picked up golf while stationed in Key West during WW2. Without any lessons or a ton of time or $, he turned himself into a plus handicap — our house was full of his amateur trophies. He was still shooting his age into his late 70s — just roped draw after roped draw. I’d have these conversations with him, trying to lure him into a technical discussion — I’d say, Dad, what are you trying to do as you begin to swing ... and he’d just say, I try to hit it solid. I could never get him to think or speak technically about the swing, which served him well ... it seems like you have that gift of simplicity too.
It's absolutely taken me years. I was always my own worst enemy when it comes to the mental game. Especially in college. The longer I take, the worse off I will be.
It's when I start to tinker is when bad things happen.
Start the best courses you've ever played talk!!
Quote:
In comment 15016775 McNally's_Nuts said:
Quote:
In comment 15016309 GiantGolfer said:
Quote:
You’re slowing up play!!!
Yeah, this. I'm a 1 handicap and have no idea what the OP is talking about. See ball, hit ball.
As an aside, my father was a poor kid from Western PA who picked up golf while stationed in Key West during WW2. Without any lessons or a ton of time or $, he turned himself into a plus handicap — our house was full of his amateur trophies. He was still shooting his age into his late 70s — just roped draw after roped draw. I’d have these conversations with him, trying to lure him into a technical discussion — I’d say, Dad, what are you trying to do as you begin to swing ... and he’d just say, I try to hit it solid. I could never get him to think or speak technically about the swing, which served him well ... it seems like you have that gift of simplicity too.
It's absolutely taken me years. I was always my own worst enemy when it comes to the mental game. Especially in college. The longer I take, the worse off I will be.
It's when I start to tinker is when bad things happen.
Start the best courses you've ever played talk!!
Pitching and putting, all I see is the line. But put me at say 170 yards with a thin lie ... I’m like Mackey Sasser or Steve Sax lol. If Mike in MD is reading this, he knows ... I need a lobotomy.
Agreed. After playing and practicing for 30 years, my mid-iron play still sucks, and my long-iron play is non-existent (I’ve switched to hybrids). At the same time, I have always had a short game knack ... I can get up and down from a garbage can. Not sure if that dichotomy is ever going to change — but I admire real ballstrikers who seemingly don’t need to think, they just do.
When it comes to golf, I am a very strange person. I grew up plyying football and baseball (and some hockey). I could always hit the ball farther than anyone and as a kid could hit home runs from either side of the plate.
Although I had been to the driving range before, I played my first golf round when I was 26... and I never shot over 100 ever. Not even in my first round. I also never broke 80 but I suppose that is because I never played enough to sharpen the short game which is where you pick up strokes.
Hitting the ball for distance was something I could just do. I attribute that to the same mindset I had when swinging a baseball bat. Although the motion is different, the idea of driving through the ball with acceleration is similar.
I have seen a lot of big guys try to muscle the golf club or baseball bat and it often just does not work.
Quote:
Agreed. After playing and practicing for 30 years, my mid-iron play still sucks, and my long-iron play is non-existent (I’ve switched to hybrids). At the same time, I have always had a short game knack ... I can get up and down from a garbage can. Not sure if that dichotomy is ever going to change — but I admire real ballstrikers who seemingly don’t need to think, they just do.
When it comes to golf, I am a very strange person. I grew up plyying football and baseball (and some hockey). I could always hit the ball farther than anyone and as a kid could hit home runs from either side of the plate.
Although I had been to the driving range before, I played my first golf round when I was 26... and I never shot over 100 ever. Not even in my first round. I also never broke 80 but I suppose that is because I never played enough to sharpen the short game which is where you pick up strokes.
Hitting the ball for distance was something I could just do. I attribute that to the same mindset I had when swinging a baseball bat. Although the motion is different, the idea of driving through the ball with acceleration is similar.
I have seen a lot of big guys try to muscle the golf club or baseball bat and it often just does not work.
That’s awesome. I carded a lot of 120s and 130snwhen I first started in my early 20s. Played at a 2-4 hdcp for a lot of years, but even at my best, i never hit it pure. I think at some level, some folks just have a knack.
also, hitting off of mats screws your swing. you get rewarded for hitting behind the ball which then encourages an early release. if you learn hitting off of grass you're likely to be a better golfer.
My brother in law is a golf snob. Takes lessons constantly, is all about dressing for the occasion and he belongs to a club too. So, he never beat me in a round... ever.
One day he tells me that I do not have the perfect swing, but I score well. I just laughed and said isn't the idea to get the ball into the hole with the fewest strokes possible? Who gives a fuck how it looks?
Quote:
(of which I am not one) use a club the way it's designed to be used from the very first time they pick it up.
My brother in law is a golf snob. Takes lessons constantly, is all about dressing for the occasion and he belongs to a club too. So, he never beat me in a round... ever.
One day he tells me that I do not have the perfect swing, but I score well. I just laughed and said isn't the idea to get the ball into the hole with the fewest strokes possible? Who gives a fuck how it looks?
bingo. pros have a wide range of crazy swings.