The Nautilus, the Golf Swing, Golden Ratio, Fibonacci seque

Re: The Nautilus, the Golf Swing, Golden Ratio, Fibonacci seque

Postby BomGolf222 » Sun Aug 22, 2010 9:55 am

This is a very interesting topic- nice work, 1teebox, I always enjoy when you get your ideas out here as they're always well thought out and thought provoking.
It hits home to me regarding an idea about how the game is perceived that has been forming in my mind for a good while, that being the difference between swinging a golf club and moving a golf ball. I think they're two different things, different art forms with different ends. It has repercussions in modern culture, I think, or modern culture has had repercussions on it, more specifically. It's about aesthetics, and form vs function. The bottom line, in my view, is that the pretty golf swings tend not to work very well. The 'ugly' ones, by and large, are the ones that seem to be better equipped to control the ball- Trevino, Nelson, Doyle, Chi Chi, etc. etc. all valued function over form. This may well be the swinging/hitting question.
In our modern consumer based culture, where advertising and physical 'beauty' rule the day, where video swing analysis is the answer to all problems in golf(and sells lessons!) What the swing looks like as opposed to what it actually does, seems to be what's valuable. If it looks a certain way, then it's supposed to work. I've talked a little about this before, but we seem to trust that how we do it, or how it looks, will create the results we want, as opposed to having the creation of a ball flight or how we strike it, form the shape of the action. As an aside, clearly Lag is tackling the form vs. function topic very well- when I say 'we' I mean modern golf.
I've heard more times than I care to remember, and I've regrettably said it myself, that Lee Trevino has an ugly golf swing. Yet he was arguably the best ball striker ever- how could that be? (A topic I've been thinking of posting is Hogan vs. Trevino- who struck it better?)
This is an idea that's been forming in my mind for a while, and I haven't yet gotten to the bottom of it, but this post seems to be connected to it on some level. This stuff is obviously a pretty large generalization, but I think specific things show up slowly but in dramatic ways. Cultural shifts happen gradually, but when they do happen, they tend to impact most things. Looking around us today, it's clear that the heart and soul are being ripped out of the world and in their place there's an image of something that doesn't actually exist. So why wouldn't this be the case with the golf swing? Or the whole game? Or popular music? Or economies? etc. etc. etc.
I'm not saying that humans haven't always been interested in beauty, or that beauty itself isn't real or valuable, but we seem to be creating it unnaturally more and more often in modern times, or looking in the wrong places for it, or even just completely making it up based on creating a perception or an image.
A bit heavy for a sunday morning? I need more coffee. Or less. :)
Cheers,
BOM
User avatar
BomGolf222
 
Posts: 1794
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 11:54 pm

Re: The Nautilus, the Golf Swing, Golden Ratio, Fibonacci seque

Postby 1teebox » Sun Aug 22, 2010 11:51 am

Back in '65 or '66 a Physical Ed instructor, in Junior College, for my virgin try at golf, handed me a beat up 9 iron with a dried out slippery grip to hit some balls.
He moved away to tend other students.
After the first few attempts, the balls were flying surprisingly far and reasonably straight without instruction.
I was stoked and probably already innocently hooked.
From nowhere he popped up and grabbed the club from my hands and said I was doing it all wrong, "Do it this way!"
His intensity and tone was actually, "YOU ARE AN ATHLETIC MORON! DO IT THIS WAY!".
Classic grunt PE coaching finesse for the time.
Mentally, before his inspirational critique, I was already a part time 19 year old basket case, now I was totally screwed. Groovy.
I wish he'd left me the bleep alone.
Trying to hit the pretty way his swing looked just messed me up.
Fortune Cookie Conclusion: Seeking beauty can be a slippery slope and the outcome can be ironic both in golf and the other life.
User avatar
1teebox
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 12:32 pm

Re: The Nautilus, the Golf Swing, Golden Ratio, Fibonacci seque

Postby BomGolf222 » Mon Aug 23, 2010 8:28 am

I was already a part time 19 year old basket case


Classic! I think I remember being promoted to full time at this job for a while myself- I was very talented.
Your story reminds me of IOZ getting his 'lesson' to help him get out of this crappy action...
HockeyVsHogan.png
HockeyVsHogan.png (251.55 KiB) Viewed 5783 times


As an aside re: the spirals... was it RR who posted something a while ago about them that was pretty cool?... or maybe it was Eagle? I'm pretty sure it was one of them...
User avatar
BomGolf222
 
Posts: 1794
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 11:54 pm

Re: The Nautilus, the Golf Swing, Golden Ratio, Fibonacci seque

Postby CaptainChaos » Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:23 am

1teebox wrote:We often hear observers say the swing of a good golfer is rhythmic, flowing, and beautiful.


Interesting stuff. However, regardless of rhythmic, flowing or beautiful....I'm fostering a swing that keeps the rectangles (golden or otherwise) off my scorecard! ;)

Cheers,
Captain Chaos
User avatar
CaptainChaos
 
Posts: 986
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 6:38 am

Re: The Nautilus, the Golf Swing, Golden Ratio, Fibonacci seque

Postby LipOut » Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:50 am

BomGolf222 wrote:It hits home to me regarding an idea about how the game is perceived that has been forming in my mind for a good while, that being the difference between swinging a golf club and moving a golf ball. I think they're two different things, different art forms with different ends. It has repercussions in modern culture, I think, or modern culture has had repercussions on it, more specifically. It's about aesthetics, and form vs function. The bottom line, in my view, is that the pretty golf swings tend not to work very well. BOM


Very well said. I believe this may have originited from the way we percieve a golf swing in realtime, as we normally see them in person or on TV. Because the player is swinging fast, we can really only see the backswing, maybe a little of the start down, then its a big blur until the finish swivel. However, the part of the swing that the golf ball cares about is in the blur...3rd parallel to 4th parallel or even up to vertical. Combine this with the fact that muscle exertions are obscured by clothing and applied forces are unseen because they are reacted with the ground or the golf club and you wind up with people teaching the parts of the swing they easily observe...fixing the top of the backswing and the grip at setup. A highly functional swing may involve asymmetry, sudden motion, and a generally non-relaxed look that is easily percieved as ugly. Somewhere along the line the golfing world developed a love with "effortless power". I believe that's why so many people love Hogan's motion... he was able to take the functional, "ugly", aspects of the swing and make them look asthaetically pleasing. Knudsen too. That's why people get so confused trying to mimic Hogan. I no longer believe it was effortless. Not with how much I've sweated in ABS.
User avatar
LipOut
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 8:32 pm

Re: The Nautilus, the Golf Swing, Golden Ratio, Fibonacci seque

Postby lagpressure » Tue Aug 24, 2010 11:40 am

I no longer believe it was effortless. Not with how much I've sweated in ABS.


Much like a duck on the water.. it looks graceful, yet it is really working hard with it's feet under the water to give that
graceful looking glide.
User avatar
lagpressure
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8174
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:50 pm

Re: The Nautilus, the Golf Swing, Golden Ratio, Fibonacci seque

Postby lagpressure » Tue Aug 24, 2010 12:17 pm

Here are some diagrams sent over by Saul Berstein who is one of my favorite artists.
http://saulbernstein.com

Saul is an enormously accomplished fine artist, and I have invited him over here to add into this discussion if he would be so kind as to contribute.

phi2.jpg
phi2.jpg (340.96 KiB) Viewed 5589 times


phi 1.jpg
phi 1.jpg (197.77 KiB) Viewed 5595 times


phi3.jpg
phi3.jpg (88.79 KiB) Viewed 5585 times
User avatar
lagpressure
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8174
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:50 pm

Re: The Nautilus, the Golf Swing, Golden Ratio, Fibonacci seque

Postby Range Rat » Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:27 pm

Bom:....that side-by-side of Hogan and the other guy is still the most fascinating photo I've seen in a long time.

It looks like he is a field hockey player....I know nothing about that endeavor, do you happen to know by way of the picture what type of shot he is playing....how is it executed....and how might it be different from other field hockey shots. Is the photo capturing just a "basic" shot that any field hockey player should be proficient with.

Is it a shot with loft? A lot of questions, I know, but it's such a wonderful comparison. :) RR
You're ahead of where you were, and behind where you're going.
User avatar
Range Rat
 
Posts: 2356
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:30 am

Re: The Nautilus, the Golf Swing, Golden Ratio, Fibonacci seque

Postby lagpressure » Tue Aug 24, 2010 8:07 pm

It's interesting to make note of the five divisions...

Without consciously knowing this... we move the golf swing to PV5.

I very much feel five distinct feelings in the golf swing if I break them down.

1. The initial movement away from the ball
2. The move through transition into the slot
3. The firing into impact from P3
4. The post impact pivot acceleration (second stage rocket firing)
5. Preservation of impact alignments (PV5 intention)

It's interesting to note the five appendages coming off the torso, then to 5 fingers. Five openings on the face, and five senses.

Reviewing module 7, I talk about the 5 points of connection pressure centers in the body.

Certainly fascinating stuff.
User avatar
lagpressure
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8174
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:50 pm

Re: The Nautilus, the Golf Swing, Golden Ratio, Fibonacci seque

Postby BomGolf222 » Thu Aug 26, 2010 8:42 am

RR,
That photo is a bit of a mind blower for sure. As far as I know, and IOZ would be better equipped to answer, it's a standard enough shot where the ball leaves the ground- how high, I'm not sure. In the small world thread there are full sequences from that shot as well as more of a drag type shot where I'm pretty sure the ball stays close to the ground. The stick itself has no loft, and that's a give away in itself.
I'm sure that the length of arm swing going back, or lack thereof, is what forces that 'position' coming down as the body creates force in a short enough period of time. Both Hogan and that hockey player have fairly limited arms swing going back. As an aside, I also think the forward/downward action is actually what elongates, or completes the shoulder turn, but again, it's in the name of creating power that it happens. I'm not aware of any other sport that recommends an active shoulder turn other than golf- If any body knows one let me know. As a general rule, the appearance of delay in the parts of the body out to the thing that's being thrown/used etc., happens in the forward/downward action- a baseball pitcher, for example. Nelson had a pretty limited backswing shoulder turn, instead going back together- Trevino too imo. Obviously, the shoulders turn, and the bits above always turn more than the bits below, but I do think that the separation is as a result of acceleration in the direction you're looking to go. This is probably for a different thread- sorry for the hijack, 1T...
Lag,
Thanks for posting those diagrams... very interesting stuff.
User avatar
BomGolf222
 
Posts: 1794
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 11:54 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Top Threads (2000 Club)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron