Wednesday, February 15, 2006

I Think Erik and I Can Agree on a Few Things

Erik commented on my last post and there are some points we can agree on. Here's his comment:

"No, we don't agree, because there are simply too many other variables to consider. Tempo, how much wrist hinge and "lag" a swing employs, etc. The list is huge and you can't lump it in with "all other things being equal" because that's 100 other things... it's a cop-out. The original post was silly in how simple it was, and misleading at best.

Though a taller golfer needs less angular velocity to reach clubhead velocity of 120 MPH, the weight of his arms more than counters this. "All things being equal," the taller golfer has to do more "work" to reach 120 MPH. I'm using the classic definition of work: energy expended. Not whether it feels like it's harder to do or not.

Furthermore, CoR and shaft flex do matter because a swing that's still accelerating when it reaches 120 MPH versus a swing that's slightly decelerating at impact will behave differently with the same CoR and shaft flex.

Again, the initial post and even this one are far too simple. It's misleading. There are a lot more things to golf than the speed of a clubhead at impact, regardless of how tall the people that swung them are.

It was a "dumb" post because it "dumbed" the golf swing down to a level beyond silly. "

I whole heartedly agree that without everything being equal a whole slew of variables come into play. No doubt about it.

I can also say that the question was unrealistic because they weren't taking into consideration all of those variables.

I can also agree that there is a slight difference between the clubhead accelerating to 120 when it impacts the ball as opposed to decelerating because the ball stays on the clubface for a short amount of time allowing the clubhead to continue to act on the ball for a brief amount of time. If the clubhead is accelerating it will send the ball a little farther than if it was declerating.

I also agree that there are alot more things involved than just clubhead speed at impact. For instance if you have a cheap set of clubs that aren't fitted for you, you would have a hard time out driving someone with a good, fitted set no matter how tall you are.

I even accept your explanation that it dumbed down the golf swing. Yes it did remove all the variables you had mentioned and therefore could be considered a dumbed down version of a very complex swing.

There is one thing we still disagree on. If you took a tall golfer and a short one, had a professional fit them both with the same quality clubs, I still contend the shorter guy will have to swing faster to get to 120 mph. Because of that he would most likely have to expend more jules (the unit used for measurement of energy). I say "most likely" because I really don't know for sure not ever having done an experiment. I'm surprised you seem so sure that because a tall golfer's arms weigh more than a short golfer that he will expend more jules of energy to reach 120 mph. How do you know this?

Lastly, I made the post more for entertainment than to be scrutinized and taken so seriously although for me this conversation has been fun.

Golf Times

2 Comments:

Blogger Erik @ The Sand Trap said...

Welcome to Golf Times. The baseball bats are here, the dead horses are over there. Beat away! :-)

7:37 PM  
Blogger Mattb said...

Yeah I think it's time to put this puppy to bed.

10:07 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

|
 View My Public Stats on MyBlogLog.com Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com