Quote:
Originally Posted by
dereckbc 
I respectively disagree and so do physics and the major majority of instructors.
Then the majority of instructors are wrong. It wouldn't be the first time - the "majority of instructors" STILL don't know the ball flight laws.
Fortunately for us the laws of physics don't care how people vote.
Also, "physics" agrees with me. Talk to a physicist or a guy who has a background in the sciences. Like me. 
Now, in the past some have taken my responses to things like this to be more aggressive than they think is necessary, but from where I'm sitting, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that you're wrong. This isn't opinion, it's the realm of science and fact, and I take the education people get on my forum very seriously. I want them to get the BEST information, and the CORRECT information. So I speak unequivocally.
You are wrong. Let's explore more of the reasons why:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dereckbc 
Using the thought you imply is a guaranteed method to promote casting the club and coming over the top.
Oh brother. FWIW I was giving you an out by saying that perhaps some people might like to FEEL or THINK they accelerate the clubhead THROUGH impact, because I've been clear in saying that they don't actually want to do that. Feel ain't real.
(Snipped out parts where you try to put words into my mouth, etc. Please, don't do that.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dereckbc 
The human brain and body is not capable of timing what you suggest.
What timing have I suggested? I haven't.
I have simply said that the best golfers reach maximum clubhead speed AT the ball. To do so AFTER the ball would be to waste speed. It's a pretty simple concept. Thousands of great golfers reach maximum speed within an inch or so of impact. Clearly the human brain and body are "capable" of doing just that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dereckbc 
I certainly cannot even begin to teach that.
Uhm...?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dereckbc 
I certainly cannot even begin to teach that. What I can teach, and the brain/body can do is accelerate through the ball. It is very easily to visualize by cracking the WHIP just ahead of the ball, not at the ball as you suggest. The swing does not stop at impact.
Nobody's said it does. Furthermore, I've never said players hit "at" the ball or do any such thing as you want to keep claiming.
Read what I wrote. I'm discussing two things:
1) What ACTUALLY happens at impact (specifically among the game's best players).
2) What may be a "feel" that might work for someone.
I've spent the vast majority of my time talking about what ACTUALLY happens (#1 above).
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dereckbc 
Notice the bend in the shaft and hands leading the club. There is only 1 physical way to do that: Accelerate through impact.
I could create that picture accelerating, decelerating, or maintaining a constant speed.
Again, so that I'm clear: the best golfers deliver the clubhead at maximum speed at the golf ball. Period.
I'm not making any claims as to HOW they do it, what they FEEL or THINK they're doing, etc. I'm talking about the pure physics of it. The clubhead does not accelerate AFTER impact in the game's best players. It reaches maximum speed just prior to or right at impact, then - because of the ball, good timing, the ground, etc. - the clubhead immediately decelerates.
Some low handicappers will have peak speed after impact (though only on teed balls - the ground tends to slow the clubhead down too much to recover). Many/most poor players will have peak speed well before impact. The best players have peak speed AT impact.
Very simple concept.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
saevel25 
The idea you need to accelerate through a bunker shot is crap. Most people think Amateurs don't accelerate through a bunker shot, or give up on it, is false. Most of them over compensate for poor advice and throw off there whole timing. How many Amateurs do you see who chunk a bunker shot, why because they think, "i got to accelerate through the shot", and they release the clubhead way to soon, causing it to bottom out way before the ball.
If you look at a tennis strike's kinetic chain, it has the same characteristics as a golf club. Hip rotation, coupled with torso rotation, up to the arm, then whipped through by the tennis racket, with acceleration of the racket being near zero at impact for MAXIMUM racket speed.
Golf or Tennis, the kinetic chain for the club or racket is a Parabola, meaning that the maximum speed is when acceleration is ZERO. that is basic calculus. For hitting a golf ball or hitting a tennis ball, its speed that counts, not acceleration.
saevel nails it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dereckbc 
You just made my point. an early release is casting the club or throwing the club at the ball. Video evidence of good bunker players is over whelming proof because the club club passes the ball out of the trap.
That's not proof of much, particularly since the clubhead doesn't even touch the golf ball in a bunker shot. The sand is impacted, and the leading particles of sand aren't passed by the clubhead. Furthermore, the clubhead is traveling on a completely different path than the ball on a pitch shot (let's remove the sand), so yeah it can "catch up" because the ball, once struck, has only gravity and air (friction) to slow it down while the clubhead has a dude with muscles attached. If it's decelerating more slowly than gravity (but still decelerating) it could "catch up" to the ball - but again, we don't even see that happening, and any illusion of the clubhead "catching up" is because the ball is not traveling on the same path as the clubhead. The clubhead is traveling very flat (large lateral vector, i.e. forward) while the ball is traveling UP and its lateral vector is very small.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
phillyk 
I think physics-wise, the difference between accelerating through impact and having no acceleration at impact are negligible for the speed the clubhead will have at impact. The amount of energy put into the ball from the clubhead's mass and velocity will transfer to the mass and speed of the clubhead after impact, the amount of spin the ball will have, and the mass and velocity of the ball, minus some residual heat from the impact. Based on some numbers I found on the web and from iacas's masses of the ball and clubhead, a rough calculation based purely on those parameters reduces the velocity, of the clubhead after impact, dramatically. Now, the percentage of velocity lost if you were "accelerating through impact" versus making sure the velocity was maxed at impact is small. In REALITY, the velocity at impact will be the highest throughout the whole swing. To make it FEEL better, the notion of saying to try and "accelerate through impact" might help players focus on swinging towards the target, even if they lose a small portion of the possible velocity.
Yup.
And the fact remains that if you actually somehow accelerated AFTER impact, that would be an INEFFICIENT swing because you'd be wasting "speed." Speed after impact is useless.
The ball's gone - do you want to have 100 MPH clubhead speed at impact and 110 MPH when the ball is ten yards down the fairway, or would you rather have 110 MPH clubhead speed at impact and 100 MPH when the ball's twelve yards down the fairway?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
phillyk 
OK, i did another calculation for the difference in velocity, between the bottom of the swing with full velocity and an acceleration through impact velocity, with the following assumptions: the down swing starts with shaft parallel with ground, constant acceleration in the swing to max velocity (with other assumptions = about .072miles/s^2), a time of .4s for the downswing (to impact area), a man's arm length of 33", a driver shaft length of 44.5", the speed at the bottom of the swing is 100mph, and that an "acceleration through impact" would mean making the top speed appear at about 35° past the bottom of the swing. I can do other quantities if you want me too. To reach that 35° mark from the bottom of the swing takes .026sec making the velocity at that point 106.8mph, an added velocity of 6.8mph. So, I guess it does make a bit of difference.
Your math doesn't shed any light on the subject. Again, who cares what your clubhead speed is after the ball is gone? If you're hitting the ball with 100 MPH and reaching 106.8 MPH after the ball's gone, you'd be better off toping out at 103 MPH at the golf ball than whatever you're doing to reach 106.8 35° after impact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dereckbc 
You think?

Try to put that swing thought in your head and hit at the ball and see what happens. Or you could do what the Pros do and KISS by just accelerating through the ball to the target. The secret is a constant and deliberate acceleration through impact. and crack the whip in front of the ball toward the target.
You said before that thinking about accelerating through impact will lead to casting and coming over the top, didn't you?
Pros accelerate TO impact, not THROUGH impact. Very plain to see, and well understood among the actual scientists who are involved with the game of golf. Talk to some of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dereckbc 
There is is only 1 physical way to do that.
No there isn't. You could arrive at that position, again, with positive or negative acceleration (deceleration) or a constant cruising speed.
Pros arrive at impact with their maximum speed. They're not accelerating after impact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dereckbc 
He accelerated through the ball.
No he didn't (and saying it over and over again doesn't make it true).
Quote:
Originally Posted by
saevel25 
Assuming the maximum speed happens when the club is fully extended is wrong. If Rory was accelerating through impact, the graph would extend past impact by a lot more. But it doesn't it crests at or just before impact. This means, even if his hands are forward, the clubhead is reaching max speed before its fully released.
I'm pretty sure tiger is thinking about the shot than Accelerate through the ball. He knows his impact position is going to promote the speed he wants. To think otherwise brings in factors that are beyond the scope of any shot.
Bingo. Several gold stars for saevel today.
Why would Rory want to reach maximum speed with his driver after the ball's gone? That wouldn't make any freaking sense! It would be inefficient. He'd be wasting energy.
The ball is not "compressed extra" if you're "accelerating" through impact... and you ain't accelerating through impact. Even if you were, DURING IMPACT the clubhead would be decelerating because it goes from swinging through the air to, you know, whacking a (relatively) heavy golf ball. It's not a cotton ball, after all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lihu 
At first I thought at if you could put more dwell time on the club and ball impact that more energy is transferred and the velocity of the ball is increased due to the constant or even increasing force on it for a longer time. The flaw is that if the time does not increase, then this does not affect the ball velocity.
It doesn't. Impact lasts about 400 microseconds for almost every shot in golf, oddly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Righty to Lefty 
I'm agreeing with the fact that they are in fact accelerating through the punch....but the fact is that when the punch meets resistance ( the boxer's head) energy begins to be transferred and therefore the net effect is a loss of speed because it was transferred in to the boxer's head.
I agree except for the fact that they're not doing that "in fact" - they're just feeling like they are.