Compression?

John Graham
I'm hoping this will help me understand Hinge Action/Motion (sorry, as I'm still working on my terminology).

If two players wind up at impact separation with the clubhead, face and shaft in the exact same alignments all at the same speed and hitting the ball in the same spot on the face with every other alignment matching with the only difference being that one player arrived there after a Horizontal Hinge action and other player arrived there after a Vertical Hinge Action.

Which shot has better compression and why?

I think they would be the same.
KevCarter
Originally Posted by John Graham I'm hoping this will help me understand Hinge Action/Motion (sorry, as I'm still working on my terminology).

If two players wind up at impact separation with the clubhead, face and shaft in the exact same alignments all at the same speed and hitting the ball in the same spot on the face with every other alignment matching with the only difference being that one player arrived there after a Horizontal Hinge action and other player arrived there after a Vertical Hinge Action.

Which shot has better compression and why?

I think they would be the same.
Great question, and I look forward to hearing the answer...

My first thought was that you can't create the same amount of club-head speed with vertical hinging as you can with horizontal hinging, but I always confuse horizontal hinging with the #3 accumulator... just can't get my head around the difference sometimes, and I know the difference is huge. See ya later, gotta go do a little studying myself, I shouldn't be this far behind!

Kevin
airair
Originally Posted by John Graham I'm hoping this will help me understand Hinge Action/Motion (sorry, as I'm still working on my terminology).

If two players wind up at impact separation with the clubhead, face and shaft in the exact same alignments all at the same speed and hitting the ball in the same spot on the face with every other alignment matching with the only difference being that one player arrived there after a Horizontal Hinge action and other player arrived there after a Vertical Hinge Action.

Which shot has better compression and why?

I think they would be the same.
I have nothing to offer as an answer, but I can join in by asking if compression and ballflight are related? The horizontal hinge action gives longer and lower shots with more roll than the vertical hinge action does, but that doesn't necessary mean that the compression is different? I don't know. But the force applied (if that is the same as compression?) - will behave differently and give different ballflights.
Testing, testing.
EdZ
The short answer...

Horizontal hinge motion is more efficient, so given similar parameters leading up to impact, when the ball leaves the face horizontal hinge motion will impart more force to the ball than a vertical hinge.

There is a 'leak' of power inherent in a vertical hinge.
mb6606
Originally Posted by John Graham I'm hoping this will help me understand Hinge Action/Motion (sorry, as I'm still working on my terminology).

If two players wind up at impact separation with the clubhead, face and shaft in the exact same alignments all at the same speed and hitting the ball in the same spot on the face with every other alignment matching with the only difference being that one player arrived there after a Horizontal Hinge action and other player arrived there after a Vertical Hinge Action.

Which shot has better compression and why?

I think they would be the same.
They would have the same compression!
True VH allows only manipulation of the loft (layback) HH allows manipulation of the clubface to the left or right (no layback). In other words it would be easy to hit a high soft shot with VH and a low hook with HH.
O.B.Left
Im thinking there are factors, club loft for instance. But the compression would be different.

The more loft to the club the more the layback will induce a roll up the face or a roll off the face even for VH. Whereas HH will tend to see the point of contact between ball and face remain together, with "as if welded together" being the ideal.
BerntR
Vertical and horizontal hinge both have very good ball compression characteristics.

Keeping the loft of the club out of the equation, the vertical hinge action itself will impose back spin while a horizontal hinge action will impose side spin. We're talking as perfec as it gets here, and then a horizontal hinge will produce a draw. This is layback without closing vs closing without layback.

If we're talking about a human golfer it is very difficult to anticipate that all other alingments can be the same. Dual Horizontal hinge has the largest clubhead to hands speed ratio, while vertical hinge has the smallest. So if the clubhead speed is the same, the vertical hinge will have greater hands speed, and thus a greater effective swing arch and more effective mass-velocity to back up the collision with the ball.

As long as the vertical hinge can keep up with the horizontal - which isn't very long - I guess you will get more ball compression due to the faster hands.
mb6606
Originally Posted by BerntR Vertical and horizontal hinge both have very good ball compression characteristics.

Keeping the loft of the club out of the equation, the vertical hinge action itself will impose back spin while a horizontal hinge action will impose side spin. We're talking as perfec as it gets here, and then a horizontal hinge will produce a draw. This is layback without closing vs closing without layback.

If we're talking about a human golfer it is very difficult to anticipate that all other alingments can be the same. Dual Horizontal hinge has the largest clubhead to hands speed ratio, while vertical hinge has the smallest. So if the clubhead speed is the same, the vertical hinge will have greater hands speed, and thus a greater effective swing arch and more effective mass-velocity to back up the collision with the ball.

As long as the vertical hinge can keep up with the horizontal - which isn't very long - I guess you will get more ball compression due to the faster hands.
The question was based on all things being equal. The ball is on the clubface for 1/2 a millisecond. Therefore compression has to be equal. VH allows one to add loft versus HH. So for less compression the face would have to be layed back more at impact (therefore it is no longer equal).
Yoda
Originally Posted by BerntR
Keeping the loft of the club out of the equation, the vertical hinge action itself will impose back spin while a horizontal hinge action will impose side spin.
Busy week guys and may not be able to come back, but . .

Perfectly executed . . .

Both Vertical and Horizontal Action produce Backspin. This is what gets the ball in the air.

Neither produce a 'side spin'.

Daryl
HB, I couldn't agree more.
Yoda
For those posting in this thread and here http://lynnblakegolf.com/forum/thread7695.html, please do not expect soon a reply from Mr. Graham.

He is, shall we say . . .

"Unable to lunch today".

At least in this incarnation!



airair
Originally Posted by Yoda For those posting in this thread and here http://lynnblakegolf.com/forum/thread7695.html, please do not expect soon a reply from Mr. Graham.

He is, shall we say . . .

Unavailable.

At least in this incarnation!




This is perhaps more in the MacDonald style we need to practice?
Yoda
Originally Posted by airair
Threadjack complete.



All in fun with no sinester agenda.

Now back to our regular programming!
gmbtempe
Originally Posted by John Graham I'm hoping this will help me understand Hinge Action/Motion (sorry, as I'm still working on my terminology).

If two players wind up at impact separation with the clubhead, face and shaft in the exact same alignments all at the same speed and hitting the ball in the same spot on the face with every other alignment matching with the only difference being that one player arrived there after a Horizontal Hinge action and other player arrived there after a Vertical Hinge Action.

Which shot has better compression and why?

I think they would be the same.
Can compression even be measured? What machine could do this, super super slo motion camera.

It seems like if you could build a machine to create the hinges and had a way to test it that would be the only way to know beyond the theoretical.
John Graham
Originally Posted by gmbtempe Can compression even be measured? What machine could do this, super super slo motion camera.

It seems like if you could build a machine to create the hinges and had a way to test it that would be the only way to know beyond the theoretical.
I agree with that.

I've got no idea how to measure it.
O.B.Left
Originally Posted by John Graham I agree with that.

I've got no idea how to measure it.
Compression isnt needed as part of Trackmans calculations then? Again like Hinge Action, Id imagine that though compression is irrelevant to their calculations, it is anything but irrelevant to the golfer.

There must be a lot of things like that Id imagine ...... things "up stream" of the measurements made by Trackman that though "irrelevant" are still causal. "Causal" , whats happening to me? Golf nut using big words, my apologies to the people who know better.

John my position is that I see the effects of Hinge Action and use them like a tool for a lot of shots. Especially around the green. It'd be a shock to find I could just set the face and alter the plane line to get the same results. A total shock. And what about Steering, Vertical Hinging for a driver say...... Wouldnt golf be a much easier game than it is if that had no adverse effect on the ball?
mb6606
Originally Posted by gmbtempe Can compression even be measured? What machine could do this, super super slo motion camera.

It seems like if you could build a machine to create the hinges and had a way to test it that would be the only way to know beyond the theoretical.
If you can measure swing speed and mass then compression would be the difference in ball speed. So measure ball speed using the same ball and club. I create a higher ball speed with HH than VH but that may not be true for everyone.
donniek
Originally Posted by John Graham I'm hoping this will help me understand Hinge Action/Motion (sorry, as I'm still working on my terminology).

If two players wind up at impact separation with the clubhead, face and shaft in the exact same alignments all at the same speed and hitting the ball in the same spot on the face with every other alignment matching with the only difference being that one player arrived there after a Horizontal Hinge action and other player arrived there after a Vertical Hinge Action.

Which shot has better compression and why?

I think they would be the same.
Never really saw a yes or no answer to the original question......
x-man
HH action produces more distance when compared to VH action which will cause the ball to get more air. so when talking about compression id say HH action would cause more compression due to the fact that better compression leads to more distance hence HH action

thoughts?
mb6606
"If two players wind up at impact separation with the clubhead, face and shaft in the exact same alignments all at the same speed and hitting the ball in the same spot on the face with every other alignment matching"

Read the question as presented.
If the ball is on the clubface for 1/2 a millisecond how they be anything but equal?
O.B.Left
Originally Posted by mb6606 "If two players wind up at impact separation with the clubhead, face and shaft in the exact same alignments all at the same speed and hitting the ball in the same spot on the face with every other alignment matching"

Read the question as presented.
If the ball is on the clubface for 1/2 a millisecond how they be anything but equal?

I still maintain that for both Vertical and Horizontal Hinging to both display the same speed as per the original questions requisite "clubhead, face and shaft" (which includes the butt end) you'd have to zero out #3 angle. Zero out the clubhead travel associated with the various Hinge Actions. Normally, given any #3 angle , Horizontal will have a higher clubhead speed associated with any given hand speed. Not to mention the issues of "point of contact" wobble, dynamic layback, closing, etc.

1/2 a millisecond is an eternity for the golf ball. Mb you can clearly see the ball rolling up the face in high speed (compressing , rebounding too).
Yoda
Originally Posted by donniek Never really saw a yes or no answer to the original question......
Originally Posted by John Graham
If two players wind up at impact separation with the clubhead, face and shaft in the exact same alignments all at the same speed and hitting the ball in the same spot on the face with every other alignment matching with the only difference being that one player arrived there after a Horizontal Hinge action and other player arrived there after a Vertical Hinge Action.

Which shot has better compression and why?

I think they would be the same.

[Color and size emphasis by Yoda.]
And now at last:

Your question is nonsensical because it is based on a specious premise.
spe·cious (spshs)
adj.
1. Having the ring of truth or plausibility but actually fallacious: a specious argument.
2. Deceptively attractive.


Let's back up a bit and help me get this straight:

You think a Clubface could come through the incredibly violent Impact collision in two distinctly different ways -- one Closing Only and the other Laying Back Only -- and, even in just 3/4 of an inch and 4/10,000th of a second, there will be no difference in the Separation alignment?

Study Sketches 2-C-1 #3 and 2-C-2 #3, and learn the truth.

Oh, I forgot, all that Chapter 2 stuff is now just "junk science", right?

Wrong.

Nevermind . . . Let's leave the Land of Oz and head to the practice tee. Watch me hit two delicious little pitch shots. I'll hit both with the same descending blow (Clubshaft Control) and with an identical amount of force (Clubhead Control). Both shots will fly dead straight, but the second will fly distinctly higher than the first. Now . . .

Why would that be?

Answer:

Because, through Impact, my Left Wrist (Clubface Control) executed a totally different Motion. And that totally different Left Wrist Motion produced a totally different Clubface Motion. And that totally different Clubface Motion produced a totally different Separation alignment and Ball Response. Putting it simplistically . . .

Impact matters!

The fact that the ball is fifteen yards down the fairway before the player feels that Impact is immaterial. The pre-selected Left Wrist Motion is programmed as early as the Address Routine for flawless execution through Impact. The work -- the Computer's precision Programming -- was done long before and the Ball's flight is now its manifest result.

In no way does the brevity of Impact obviate the Left Wrist's vital function and predictable result.

It may, however, obscure it.

As apparently it does to those who would deny its role.


Amen Corner
Originally Posted by Yoda
Nevermind . . . Let's leave the Land of Oz and head to the practice tee. Watch me hit two delicious little pitch shots. I'll hit both with the same descending blow (Clubshaft Control) and with an identical amount of force (Clubhead Control). Both shots will fly dead straight, but the second will fly distinctly higher than the first. Now . . .

Why would that be?

Answer:

Because, through Impact, my Left Wrist (Clubface Control) executed a totally different Motion. And that totally different Left Wrist Motion produced a totally different Clubface Motion. And that totally different Clubface Motion produced a totally different Separation alignment and Ball Response. Putting it simplistically . . .

Impact matters!
Have you done this while having a Trackman / Flightscope giving you numbers?
david sandridge
Forgetting the science for a moment. I have watched at least 6 authorized instructors teach and demonstrate hinging all the way from south carolina to california. I think I have the technique down fairly well. I know that the shot pattern is different and also useful. Therefore from that standpoint it is a valid teaching concept. Now in regard to science. It would be helpful to all of us for someone like Yoda to reveal his thoughts about trackman. Although I am a scientist I would caution all not to be overawed by science. After nearly 25 years of knowing about hinging, seeing hinging demonstrated and doing it myself the statement that there is no such thing is just laughable. Perhaps the available science is lacking. Now I am a good ping pong player and pride myself on the use of sandpaper or rubber paddles. Slams and cut shots produce various ball flights. Has that been studied also and is it relative? So when I read that science disproves hinging I just don't care frankly. My lesson using a trackman was very helpful so I believe it is a useful tool. So let the discussion continue, but for the "scientists" to snicker at the masters of the hinging art makes me lose respect for them.
KevCarter
Originally Posted by david sandridge Forgetting the science for a moment. I have watched at least 6 authorized instructors teach and demonstrate hinging all the way from south carolina to california. I think I have the technique down fairly well. I know that the shot pattern is different and also useful. Therefore from that standpoint it is a valid teaching concept. Now in regard to science. It would be helpful to all of us for someone like Yoda to reveal his thoughts about trackman. Although I am a scientist I would caution all not to be overawed by science. After nearly 25 years of knowing about hinging, seeing hinging demonstrated and doing it myself the statement that there is no such thing is just laughable. Perhaps the available science is lacking. Now I am a good ping pong player and pride myself on the use of sandpaper or rubber paddles. Slams and cut shots produce various ball flights. Has that been studied also and is it relative? So when I read that science disproves hinging I just don't care frankly. My lesson using a trackman was very helpful so I believe it is a useful tool. So let the discussion continue, but for the "scientists" to snicker at the masters of the hinging art makes me lose respect for them.
I'm hearing from you there is a HUGE difference between the science, and real world teaching. I can watch YODA and VJ Trolio executing different hinge actions in basic motion and see the difference in the balls reaction with my own eyes. Great post Mr. Sandridge!

Kevin
Yoda
Originally Posted by Amen Corner
Have you done this while having a Trackman / Flightscope giving you numbers?


Conclusion:

The motion of the Left Wrist -- the Master Wrist -- and its control of the Clubface through Impact . . .

Matters.

John Graham
Originally Posted by Yoda Okay, John, you have not responded to my post #71 seeking confirmation of the "pictures" you are referencing. Forging ahead, I assume (per my post) that you mean Sketches 2-C-1/2/3.

Yes, I'm sorry I missed that one. Please accept my apologies.



Originally Posted by Yoda By the way, that was my fifth post written directly in response to one of your own and also the fifth one with zero reply from you. Mox nix to me, but I find it kind of interesting, especially given your insistence that people respond to yours "or else" you begin to wonder (your post #55).

Thanks for your responses. The other 4 responses either had no questions in them, told me my question was invalid, told me to read the book more closely or I was told that one didn't have the desire to respond.


Regarding post #55, I wrote
Originally Posted by John Graham When the questions don't get answered, that's when I start to wonder why didn't it get answered.

Did I ask a bad question?

Was my question specious as Lynn has stated?

Have I not researched enough to merit a question of this magnitude?

Maybe the questions aren't answerable or proovable and thus require an amount of faith. Nothing wrong with that.
At least a couple of these would be my fault and not an "or else" as been presumed.

Originally Posted by Yoda Two points:

1. Look closely at Sketch #1 in each of the Series, i.e., 2-C-1 #1, 2-C-2 #1 and 2-C-3 #1. You will notice that the ball is sitting on a tee, and Low Point is clearly illustrated as occurring 'in the air'. Therefore, as specifically related to these drawings, there is no contact with the ground whatsoever, much less any "pinch" effect (which, of course, doesn't happen anyway, even with the ball on the ground).
As specifically related to these drawings, I can see that the ball is on a tee. Why would a person assume that this information would change with a ball on the ground? Is low point changing? What changes so that the ball isn't driven downward from where it is resting?

Originally Posted by Yoda 2. In 2-C-1 and 2-C-2, your observation that the ball is being carried "downward and to the right" (On Plane) is correct. However, Sketch 2-C-3 illustrates the Lob Shot being executed as a deliberate Throwaway procedure. Hence, it is being carried neither downward nor to the right.
"Precision is recognizing and reconciling minute differentiations." [2-0]
Seems strange to me that only during the impact interval does the path of the club have 100% influence on the direction of the ball(down and to the right) and yet at separation it chooses to leave the face practically at right angles. How can Homer have it both ways? While on the face, only path influences ball even though the face is rotating while the ball is on it and the ball's centerlined has moved relative to both the angle of approach and arc of approach as depicted in 2-C-1#3 and this has no effect. Then all of a sudden, the ball decides to stop listening to the path and come off the face at practically right angles.

Some smart ball.

Originally Posted by Yoda I have several other comments -- actually, a comprehensive overview -- relating to the Sketches, their purpose and the precision depiction of the illustrated concepts. In it you will find the answers to a few of your earlier questions (and more). I will get to that task as time permits.

I look forward to seeing your comments.
innercityteacher
Why would you specifically relate to "these drawings" and not the chapter they are located in? Hey John, Resilience, Trajectory Control and Linear Force are all just some of the facts "baked into" those diagrams. Homer went out of his way to remind people that you have to cross -reference EVERYTHING!

For example, if you read 2-C-0 you'd see the the intentionality of the shot is "compress the ball through a particular point along a particular line..." Horizontal Hinging is intended to send the ball in a particular direction as is Layback. Lacking intentionality, the ball comes off the face of the club "practically right angles." Check 2-D-0/2-D-1, to see a larger set of factors all of which I wonder if you have considered in forming your remarks.

Homer was not an idiot or a fool (and it's fascinating to see you disrespect for him. Are you planning to sell something?) My stance on this site is that I'm learning and so I do not hold myself out as an expert. If I don't understand something, I make an observation and ask a question. But that is after reading the book and watching the videos and giving them the substantial credit they deserve. You seem to have no such restraint.

Yoda gave you some good advice.

A golf ball pays close attention to lots of factors at impact. There is a lesson there for all of us.

Originally Posted by John Graham Yes, I'm sorry I missed that one. Please accept my apologies.





Thanks for your responses. The other 4 responses either had no questions in them, told me my question was invalid, told me to read the book more closely or I was told that one didn't have the desire to respond.


Regarding post #55, I wrote


At least a couple of these would be my fault and not an "or else" as been presumed.



As specifically related to these drawings, I can see that the ball is on a tee. Why would a person assume that this information would change with a ball on the ground? Is low point changing? What changes so that the ball isn't driven downward from where it is resting?



Seems strange to me that only during the impact interval does the path of the club have 100% influence on the direction of the ball(down and to the right) and yet at separation it chooses to leave the face practically at right angles. How can Homer have it both ways? While on the face, only path influences ball even though the face is rotating while the ball is on it and the ball's centerlined has moved relative to both the angle of approach and arc of approach as depicted in 2-C-1#3 and this has no effect. Then all of a sudden, the ball decides to stop listening to the path and come off the face at practically right angles.

Some smart ball.



I look forward to seeing your comments.
John Graham
ICT,

Thank you for referring me to those passages and your input.

I don't really like to argue. I like to understand. I question until I do (if allowed).

Surely, sometimes it takes me awhile to understand and I accept my limitations in that regard.

I am truly sorry if I come off as a person that argues just to argue. It is just my way of learning. Question until understanding.

I've asked before and if that method of understanding is no longer allowed I will understand. No harm no Foul.

I am a fan of the book and use concepts from it in my own teaching.

JG
BerntR
Originally Posted by John Graham Seems strange to me that only during the impact interval does the path of the club have 100% influence on the direction of the ball(down and to the right) and yet at separation it chooses to leave the face practically at right angles. How can Homer have it both ways? While on the face, only path influences ball even though the face is rotating while the ball is on it and the ball's centerlined has moved relative to both the angle of approach and arc of approach as depicted in 2-C-1#3 and this has no effect. Then all of a sudden, the ball decides to stop listening to the path and come off the face at practically right angles.

Some smart ball.
Do you agree that "practically at right angles" means something similar to D plane?

Where do you think Homer was wrong? Do you think that the ball doesn't stick during the impact interval? That it rolls on the face? Or something else?
airair
Originally Posted by BerntR Do you agree that "practically at right angles" means something similar to D plane?

Where do you think Homer was wrong? Do you think that the ball doesn't stick during the impact interval? That it rolls on the face? Or something else?
In the 7. edition P.23 it unfortunately doesn't say "practically" any more, but "properly".
KevCarter
Another good reason to stay with the 6th!
John Graham
Originally Posted by BerntR Do you agree that "practically at right angles" means something similar to D plane?

Where do you think Homer was wrong? Do you think that the ball doesn't stick during the impact interval? That it rolls on the face? Or something else?
Practically, at right angles is excellent. I wish I had read the book many years ago and it is right in line with all modern ball flight theory. Especially, since the golf balls have become more solid.

I think Homer is incorrect about how a perfectly straight shot is created. I think it is more logical to consider the path of the club during the impact interval as a tangent instead of a cord.

I think that the ball does not get carried down and to the right during the interval. Otherwise the implications would be inconsistent with practically at right angles. It would also suggest that a ball resting on the ground is getting rammed into the ground some amount.

I agree the collision is so violent, as has been expressed here by many, to think that the ball simply does nothing but get carried from one place to another without anything else happening but compression seems illogical.

JG