The RYKE effect

[KevinRyan]

Sheriff,

I am no fan of the golfing machine. I want to use only Newtonian physics. I agree it is very difficult to learn. In my case I believed the physics was right and that enabled me to know what forces needed to be applied and when. Almost every swing thought I had had for 50 years had to be changed. I am getting better at it and in the process I am developing a few techniques to ensure the correct forces and timings are correct. I will release a book when I am confident those techniques work.

 

Kevin Ryan

[sheriff]

Good luck to you, sincerely.

[raygolf]

Sheriff,

I am no fan of the golfing machine. I want to use only Newtonian physics. I agree it is very difficult to learn. In my case I believed the physics was right and that enabled me to know what forces needed to be applied and when. Almost every swing thought I had had for 50 years had to be changed. I am getting better at it and in the process I am developing a few techniques to ensure the correct forces and timings are correct. I will release a book when I am confident those techniques work.

 

Kevin Ryan

Hi Kevin,

 i fortuately come across the RykeEffect analysis in golf.  i also have studied the mechaniques of downswing to make a precise and sure impact by maxium head speed. 

3 years ago you mentioned the possible book of this Ryke Effect, and i expect the first edition of this wonderful physical forces.  Like Steve Striker, i  make slightly wrist hinged swing and swing by this natural method. 

 I always check the golfing technique around by the internet  web ex. youtube and something.

Micheal Jacobs recently uploaded his site concernig the 3D forces alpha,beta and ganma.

and he said that the hand path is different moving down not parallelling the head plane, and near and after impact , the hand path is slowing down and move up! and turnning the left side and up of the body.   this is a secret of impact(moment of truth).

I think this method and phenomenum is almost like the move of conical pendulum.

do you think it is very same saying ?   what your thought?

thank for reading.  any comment is appreciated.  RayGolf  from Japan

2018.7.15  very hot  sunday

[Wildthing]

On 6/13/2015 at 11:15 PM, KevinRyan said:

Sheriff,

I am no fan of the golfing machine. I want to use only Newtonian physics. I agree it is very difficult to learn. In my case I believed the physics was right and that enabled me to know what forces needed to be applied and when. Almost every swing thought I had had for 50 years had to be changed. I am getting better at it and in the process I am developing a few techniques to ensure the correct forces and timings are correct. I will release a book when I am confident those techniques work.

 

Kevin Ryan

Kevin - I hope you are still around and respond to posts . Can we now assume after 3.5 yrs that you are still not confident about the techniques used to evoke the Ryke effect using Newtonian physics?  From what I've read so far,  there is still no clear explanation for the biomechanics involved in creating that 'Transverse Force'  that transforms an 'In Plane Double Pendulum motion' type golf swing to a 'Conical Pendulum motion' .  Your model still doesn't explain why some golfers like Jamie Sadlowski and other long drivers can drive the ball long distances with appreciably small Ryke angles . You have made an assumption that Jamie Sadlowski must be firming up his wrists through impact and reducing his ROC to fit the human limitations of forearm rotation (and ulnar deviation singularity) built into your computer model . In fact you have stated that the closing of JS's clubface is caused by forward shaft bend rather than him utilising the Ryke effect and that those actions allow him to 'Drive-Hold' . But have you any firm evidence it is actually happening and being repeated in other golfers who have small Ryke angles and still drive the ball long distances? For example , the latter cannot apply to Phil Mickelson (small Ryke angle) who can drive the ball a long way but is actively rotating his lead forearm through impact rather than firming it up.

[bluesmandan76]

jaxbeachpackerfan and Silver and Black,There is no simple secret to golf. Certainly holding hands low is part of the puzzle. As I was writing the section on the downswing it took 12 pages to explain my understanding of the physics mechanisms that are in play in the quarter of a second of the downswing. What I am trying to get golfers to understand with the RYKE effect is that one of the fundamental truths is that wrist release ( hammer action) is wrong and that forearm rotation with a RYKE angle is how the best golfers swing a club. That is the starting point. I hope to be able to contribute in a small way to develop techniques that everyone can use, but we have to understand what is happening first.
 
Kevin Ryan
 

This is a great explanation of the swing, Kevin. I dabbled with this approach a while back, and did gain a few yards, but struggled with keeping the bottom of my arc consistent and so went back to the double pendulum model. Your research is an incentive to go back and give it another shot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wildthing]

I've found that Kevin has patented a couple of inventions using Ryke effect phenomenon so maybe he is more involved in testing the success of their practical use before his book is published.

One is a club testing machine robot (unlike Iron Byron or Ping man that use the double-pendulum concept)  which will incorporate the Ryke effect , while another are training clubs (see the link below).

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20160051882.pdf

Imho , the double-pendulum concept is still applicable for maximising clubhead speed until  a few feet from the ball , then maybe Ryke effect can be utilised. In that patent article above , if you read the SUMMARY section 0024 he states the effect is invoked  by the movement of the leading hand downwards  but it's too vague to make much sense. It could be the leading arm pitching closer to the body during the downswing , or it could be some degree of lead palmar flexion of wrist which triggers the effect. The 'How' this Ryke effect is induced/optimised in a golf swing is still not yet clearly explained in any detail.

PS. Weird coincidence but it looks like the Ryke effect might explain why PGA men can drive the ball longer distances than LPGA ladies but still have less arm/club angular rotation speeds. Seems like everything in golf is counterintuitive. 

[Wildthing]

I've been looking at bit more closely at the 'Ryke Effect' and still waiting for Kevin Ryan to publish his book to explain the physics.  But when looking at the peripheral arm plane  (ie. signifying the golf shaft) compared to the model's 'forearm' plane, one can see that it seems to be familiar to the physics of Dr Sasho MacKenzie's passive squaring torque explanation.

 

Here is a close-up view of the model's forearm moving on the same plane as that metal rod 'plane diverter' and the view of the orientation of the peripheral arm (ie. shaft). The 'forearm' is moving down the 'diverter' plane as shown by the red arrow while you can see that the 'shaft' is behind and on a different plane causing it to rotate like a cylindrical pendulum as shown by the yellow arrow. 

 

Dr Sasho Mackenzie's (I sometimes abbreviate his name as SMK) passive club squaring torque is depicted in the below image.

 

Obviously, if Kevin Ryan can provide an alternative physics explanation for the Ryke Effect, then that will be very intriguing indeed.

Edited September 19, 2022 by Wildthing

[KevinRyan]

2 hours ago, Wildthing said:

I've been looking at bit more closely at the 'Ryke Effect' and still waiting for Kevin Ryan to publish his book to explain the physics.  But when looking at the peripheral arm plane  (ie. signifying the golf shaft) compared to the model's 'forearm' plane, one can see that it seems to be familiar to the physics of Dr Sasho MacKenzie's passive squaring torque explanation.

 

Here is a close-up view of the model's forearm moving on the same plane as that metal rod 'plane diverter' and the view of the orientation of the peripheral arm (ie. shaft). The 'forearm' is moving down the 'diverter' plane as shown by the red arrow while you can see that the 'shaft' is behind and on a different plane causing it to rotate like a cylindrical pendulum as shown by the yellow arrow. 

 

Dr Sasho Mackenzie's (I sometimes abbreviate his name as SMK) passive club squaring torque is depicted in the below image.

 

Obviously, if Kevin Ryan can provide an alternative physics explanation for the Ryke Effect, then that will be very intriguing indeed.

Wild Thing,

Interesting that you found a patent application of mine that tried to develop a club with a bent handle that would replicate the Ryke Effect. The patent was rejected because a prior patent had been granted ( I think for a putter). I built a few prototypes that were mildly successful but could not achieve the increase in clubhead speed that pros achieve.

You suggest that the SMK passive club squaring torque is the same as the Ryke Effect, however they are very different. If you watch The full Ryke effect video you see that the RE is caused by an increasing torque around the lead arm that is caused by an active transverse force or torque on the lead arm that forces the hand path inside its starting path. At impact. this produces the Ryke Angle that we see in pro golfers.

The SMK passive torque is produced because the club shaft is offset from the arm path. As the arm continues on its original path the passive torque reduces as the club shaft and arm shaft come into alignment at impact. There is no Ryke Angle at impact. This is a very weak Torque compared to the increasing torque of the Ryke Effect that both rotates the lead arm and the club along the shaft.

I am not yet prepared to publish because I think the Ryke Effect is only part of the story of the swing. Until I can explain the Clubhead speed problem I will continue to investigate.

Kevin Ryan

[Wildthing]

10 hours ago, KevinRyan said:

Wild Thing,

Interesting that you found a patent application of mine that tried to develop a club with a bent handle that would replicate the Ryke Effect. The patent was rejected because a prior patent had been granted ( I think for a putter). I built a few prototypes that were mildly successful but could not achieve the increase in clubhead speed that pros achieve.

You suggest that the SMK passive club squaring torque is the same as the Ryke Effect, however they are very different. If you watch The full Ryke effect video you see that the RE is caused by an increasing torque around the lead arm that is caused by an active transverse force or torque on the lead arm that forces the hand path inside its starting path. At impact. this produces the Ryke Angle that we see in pro golfers.

The SMK passive torque is produced because the club shaft is offset from the arm path. As the arm continues on its original path the passive torque reduces as the club shaft and arm shaft come into alignment at impact. There is no Ryke Angle at impact. This is a very weak Torque compared to the increasing torque of the Ryke Effect that both rotates the lead arm and the club along the shaft.

I am not yet prepared to publish because I think the Ryke Effect is only part of the story of the swing. Until I can explain the Clubhead speed problem I will continue to investigate.

Kevin Ryan

Hi Kevin  - many thanks for your reply

I'm assuming that the SMK torque can be partially used to square the clubface but can also be supplemented by musculature forearm rotation. Theoretically, the golfer can still have a 'Ryke Angle' at impact just by utilising and timing both mechanisms.

In your videos, is the peripheral arm (ie. shaft) moving at similar angular velocities as a real golfer's swing?  For example, have you made any videos of your model showing the Ryke Effect in action at angular velocities that are comparable to a real golfer's swing?  I'd just like to see how much the model clubface rotates square by an imagined impact position.

Wildthing

PS. I forgot to add , that the SMK passive torque can also be triggered if the lead arm/forearm moves slightly steeper to the shaft plane in the downswing.  For example , both lead arm and shaft could be on the same plane starting the downswing, then the lead arm could be moved slightly closer to the golfer on a steeper plane . This will cause a passive torque effect which imho is the same physics as the SMK passive torque effect and Ryke Effect.

Edited September 20, 2022 by Wildthing

[Wildthing]

Hi Kevin - here is another example from your other video

 

If you look at a frame image at the start of the downswing, both the proximal/peripheral  arms seem to be on the yellow plane line.  But as the downswing progresses, the proximal arm is deflected to the red plane.   Unless I'm mistaken, this seems to create the same geometry for the physics of SMK passive torque.

Have I made an error in my thinking here?

PS.

Can you please elaborate on what you mean when you say "Until I can explain the Clubhead speed problem I will continue to investigate".  I thought you had stated that RE cannot increase clubhead speed (see below comment you once posted on youtube).

""If I implied that the RYKE Effect increased CHS then that is incorrect. It is a mechanism that closes the clubface and adds very little to CHS. However I am now starting to understand sets of forces that can not only produce the closing of the clubface but also very significant increases in CHS. More of that later. I am still refining the process and understanding how and why these forces are generated. I am now convinced more than ever that I can achieve the 40 to 50 yard target."

So are you implying that the golfer is doing something different with the forces applied at the grip that can increase CHS?  When I say different, I mean something that does not match the inverse dynamic graphs as per below, which is a typical pattern for tour pros.

SMK

 

Dr Kwon

 

 

 

Edited September 20, 2022 by Wildthing

[Grasmere5]

Hi Kevin, I like this sort of analysis to try to understand why one golfer v another can hit the ball quite different distances, eg 15 yr old girl v 30 yr old man, where the girl hits it effortlessly way longer.

Can you elaborate on something you’ve identified from your studies that can help us know more about what we are ‘not’ doing well enough?

I hit my 3w around 210 and driver 210-215/220, the difference is ridiculously small and the 3w is more consistent so ide like to understand more what I do differently or incorrectly when I pick up the driver. I do like self analysis so I know what I’m trying to do. I suspect I’m too ‘armsy’ with my driver!

 

Edited September 20, 2022 by Grasmere5

[KevinRyan]

On 9/20/2022 at 10:45 PM, Grasmere5 said:

Hi Kevin, I like this sort of analysis to try to understand why one golfer v another can hit the ball quite different distances, eg 15 yr old girl v 30 yr old man, where the girl hits it effortlessly way longer.

Can you elaborate on something you’ve identified from your studies that can help us know more about what we are ‘not’ doing well enough?

I hit my 3w around 210 and driver 210-215/220, the difference is ridiculously small and the 3w is more consistent so ide like to understand more what I do differently or incorrectly when I pick up the driver. I do like self analysis so I know what I’m trying to do. I suspect I’m too ‘armsy’ with my driver!

 

Grasmere5,

Your observations about distance from a 15 year old girl is precisely the reason that for the last 20 years I have been obsessed in trying to understand the physics of how they achieve this Clubhead speed and why I am questioning all the physics fundamentals of the golf swing.

Kevin Ryan

[Wildthing]

30 minutes ago, KevinRyan said:

Grasmere5,

Your observations about distance from a 15 year old girl is precisely the reason that for the last 20 years I have been obsessed in trying to understand the physics of how they achieve this Clubhead speed and why I am questioning all the physics fundamentals of the golf swing.

Kevin Ryan

Hi Kevin

I am assuming that you agree that tour pros swing in some optimal manner but that you are questioning the physics being used to explain their swing kinetics.

We will only truly know how tour pros interact with the club once we have a reliable and accurate method to record the forces/torques applied by each hand on the golf grip. As far as I am aware, there have been only 2 research articles that have attempted this feat but whose results didn't match the inverse dynamic graphs (after they were reviewed by Dave Tutelman).

Opening the loop -- instrumented grips (tutelman.com)

Whatever your findings regarding the kinetics, won't they also still need to line up with the typical inverse dynamic graphs for tour pros? 

[KevinRyan]

On 9/20/2022 at 6:57 PM, Wildthing said:

Hi Kevin - here is another example from your other video

 

If you look at a frame image at the start of the downswing, both the proximal/peripheral  arms seem to be on the yellow plane line.  But as the downswing progresses, the proximal arm is deflected to the red plane.   Unless I'm mistaken, this seems to create the same geometry for the physics of SMK passive torque.

Have I made an error in my thinking here?

PS.

Can you please elaborate on what you mean when you say "Until I can explain the Clubhead speed problem I will continue to investigate".  I thought you had stated that RE cannot increase clubhead speed (see below comment you once posted on youtube).

""If I implied that the RYKE Effect increased CHS then that is incorrect. It is a mechanism that closes the clubface and adds very little to CHS. However I am now starting to understand sets of forces that can not only produce the closing of the clubface but also very significant increases in CHS. More of that later. I am still refining the process and understanding how and why these forces are generated. I am now convinced more than ever that I can achieve the 40 to 50 yard target."

So are you implying that the golfer is doing something different with the forces applied at the grip that can increase CHS?  When I say different, I mean something that does not match the inverse dynamic graphs as per below, which is a typical pattern for tour pros.

SMK

 

Dr Kwon

 

 

 

Wildthing,

This was an analysis I was doing some 8 years ago. As with any analysis, there is an endpoint where you need to say "this has been useful in explaining a part of the problem, but we need to move on to understand other aspects of a very difficult problem. For example is there any relationship between Ground Reaction Forces and the swing or what role does weight shift have in the swing. The human body has been able to "invent" many different mechanisms to achieve its goal (the swing). Maybe the Double Pendulum model and anything related to that bit of physics is past it's used-by-date.

I have moved on in my investigations and therefore going any further forensically with this topic will not be very useful.

Kevin Ryan

[Grasmere5]

9 hours ago, KevinRyan said:

Grasmere5,

Your observations about distance from a 15 year old girl is precisely the reason that for the last 20 years I have been obsessed in trying to understand the physics of how they achieve this Clubhead speed and why I am questioning all the physics fundamentals of the golf swing.

Kevin Ryan

Have you seen Dr Kwon re golf bio mechanics on YouTube? 

[Wildthing]

Here is the link to videos explaining the science behind his grf opinions.

DrKwonGolf - YouTube

[Wildthing]

Here is Shawn Clement's lightweight daughter driving the ball 300+ yards.

Imho, the reason for her high clubhead speed is:

1. A long hand path because of her flexibility in her pelvis/torso/shoulder girdle.

2. Her ability to pivot in a kinematic sequence from the ground up (ie. pelvis/chest/shoulders/arms/club) to create force via her hands on the club that is directed more through it's COM in the early -mid downswing.  This means she is able to do more work on the club (ie. transfer more energy into the club and increase its kinetic energy). By directing the force closer to the COM , she will limit any early release of the club (ie. unhinging of her lead wrist).

3. Her ability to actively extend her lead side just after P5 which can help redirect the net force across the grip so it's more vertical by the time she reaches P6. This will increase the 'In Plane MOF' which will angularly accelerate the club into impact (see image below). The white arrow represents the net force applied to the grip via her hands and this will depend on her ability to actively extend her lead side (and subsequently her lead shoulder socket) up and back. The angular acceleration (rotation) of the club caused by the 'In Plane Moment of Force' is signified by the yellow arrow.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 23, 2022 by Wildthing

[Grasmere5]

On 9/22/2022 at 6:19 PM, Wildthing said:

Here is Shawn Clement's lightweight daughter driving the ball 300+ yards.

Imho, the reason for her high clubhead speed is:

1. A long hand path because of her flexibility in her pelvis/torso/shoulder girdle.

2. Her ability to pivot in a kinematic sequence from the ground up (ie. pelvis/chest/shoulders/arms/club) to create force via her hands on the club that is directed more through it's COM in the early -mid downswing.  This means she is able to do more work on the club (ie. transfer more energy into the club and increase its kinetic energy). By directing the force closer to the COM , she will limit any early release of the club (ie. unhinging of her lead wrist).

3. Her ability to actively extend her lead side just after P5 which can help redirect the net force across the grip so it's more vertical by the time she reaches P6. This will increase the 'In Plane MOF' which will angularly accelerate the club into impact (see image below). The white arrow represents the net force applied to the grip via her hands and this will depend on her ability to actively extend her lead side (and subsequently her lead shoulder socket) up and back. The angular acceleration (rotation) of the club caused by the 'In Plane Moment of Force' is signified by the yellow arrow.

 

 

 

 

Couldn’t have put it better myself  it’s the lack of all that is why I can only drive circa 240 at 68 yrs old 

Watched the vid, and whilst I am physically unable to keep to my lead arm as straight as she does, I’m sure I can work on the balance and attention to what the rear foot is doing. 
 

I’m inspired particularly because it’s not a classic swing, she’s not a tall girl and I can certainly keep me rear foot flatter for longer, thanks  

 

Edited October 4, 2022 by Grasmere5

[Wildthing]

36 minutes ago, Grasmere5 said:

Couldn’t have put it better myself  it’s the lack of all that is why I can only drive circa 240 at 68 yrs old 

Ditto and I am approaching 64 with an average driving distance the same (if I strike it near the sweet spot which is about 50-60% of the time). All I do know is that overuse of my right arm tends to cause very errant shots which is why I try my best to swing like female golfers with a nice languid rhythm and not too much 'hit' impulse.  I always find it amazing how far the ball can actually go when you can time and release the club properly with a more natural rhythm (that fits your own body) while also hitting it close to the sweet spot.

Edited October 4, 2022 by Wildthing

[GolfSpy TCB]

On 5/28/2015 at 11:30 PM, KevinRyan said:

I will try to answer the last few posts with another short video. I have had trouble explaining this RYKE effect concept and it took me a long time to get my head around the concept. When I did get my head around it, I started to understand what the downswing does and that there needs to be a change of direction part way down in the swing. What you will see in the video is Steve Stricker's swing. He does not set his wrists and therefore they don't unhinge. He shows that you can achieve pro clubhead speeds without unhinging the wrists. He shows that in the first part of the downswing you can store energy using a small wrist angle which gets released rotationally as a conical pendulum, which very accurately straightens the clubface.

 

 

http://youtu.be/L0h1N5Un_Fg

 

Kevin Ryan

Mr. Ryan,

This is extremely fascinating! I am just now catching up to this thread (that I see starts back in 2015!).  What a tremendous theory and project you have undertaken.  It is an understatement to say I'm intrigued by your findings and the explanation of the RYKE effect.   AND.... it is A LOT to take in!!  But all great information. 

As with all golfers, we are looking for more clubhead speed, more distance - and in my personal case - I have regularly described my swing to contain some sort of "governor" keeping me from achieving even amateur average swing speeds.  As someone that has played 45 years under the mindset of the double pendulum swing thought, could this be a part of the answer?  Maybe so based on the presentation you shared, and the Stricker video.  I admit, I haven't read every post and response in this thread... but I will.

An interesting (to me) coincidence to finding your thread here... in my daily quest to find speed and distance and consistency in my swing, I came to a realization that I believe matches your theory.  I was watching one of the PGA tournaments and a commercial came on with Justin Rose.  It showed him hitting several shots edited together in succession, and I noticed that his shoulders arms and wrists all seemed to maintain the same(ish) angle through the swing.  Not being as scientific as you are, I walked straight out to my practice area and made several swings trying to maintain a static "cage" (for lack of a better way to describe it) with my shoulders, arms and hands.  What I didn't realize until reading your comments and watching your videos is that I was maintaining the upper body angles and hinges that I thought to be important in the swing - but rotating the conical portions of my pendulum.  I'm not sure if I gained swing speed, I didn't measure that, but my distance didn't suffer, the swing felt more effortless and my contact an path improved.  To my layman mind, the reason is I was manipulating my swing less to compensate for incorrect actions in my swing, which were improved with the more rigid joint swings.  

I'm sure I'm not explaining that well... but what I am trying to say, is I found some similarities in the execution of my non scientific experiment and your deeply scientific research - I just didn't have a clue until watching your video and reading your explanation. 

The bottom line is, this thread gives me more hope to improve my swing than I have had in a very long time... mainly because it is a direction to work on, opposed to just going out and trying to swing harder... incorrectly. 

I'm sure I'll have many more questions as I continue through the thread and study your research... as well as try to put these findings into practice in my own swing. 

Thank you for all the work you have done on this. 

[KevinRyan]

10 hours ago, Golfspy_TCB said:

Mr. Ryan,

This is extremely fascinating! I am just now catching up to this thread (that I see starts back in 2015!).  What a tremendous theory and project you have undertaken.  It is an understatement to say I'm intrigued by your findings and the explanation of the RYKE effect.   AND.... it is A LOT to take in!!  But all great information. 

As with all golfers, we are looking for more clubhead speed, more distance - and in my personal case - I have regularly described my swing to contain some sort of "governor" keeping me from achieving even amateur average swing speeds.  As someone that has played 45 years under the mindset of the double pendulum swing thought, could this be a part of the answer?  Maybe so based on the presentation you shared, and the Stricker video.  I admit, I haven't read every post and response in this thread... but I will.

An interesting (to me) coincidence to finding your thread here... in my daily quest to find speed and distance and consistency in my swing, I came to a realization that I believe matches your theory.  I was watching one of the PGA tournaments and a commercial came on with Justin Rose.  It showed him hitting several shots edited together in succession, and I noticed that his shoulders arms and wrists all seemed to maintain the same(ish) angle through the swing.  Not being as scientific as you are, I walked straight out to my practice area and made several swings trying to maintain a static "cage" (for lack of a better way to describe it) with my shoulders, arms and hands.  What I didn't realize until reading your comments and watching your videos is that I was maintaining the upper body angles and hinges that I thought to be important in the swing - but rotating the conical portions of my pendulum.  I'm not sure if I gained swing speed, I didn't measure that, but my distance didn't suffer, the swing felt more effortless and my contact an path improved.  To my layman mind, the reason is I was manipulating my swing less to compensate for incorrect actions in my swing, which were improved with the more rigid joint swings.  

I'm sure I'm not explaining that well... but what I am trying to say, is I found some similarities in the execution of my non scientific experiment and your deeply scientific research - I just didn't have a clue until watching your video and reading your explanation. 

The bottom line is, this thread gives me more hope to improve my swing than I have had in a very long time... mainly because it is a direction to work on, opposed to just going out and trying to swing harder... incorrectly. 

I'm sure I'll have many more questions as I continue through the thread and study your research... as well as try to put these findings into practice in my own swing. 

Thank you for all the work you have done on this. 

Mygolfspy_TCB,

Thank you for your comments. You have made some interesting observations in your post about observing Pro golfers. At this stage I am still working to understand Clubhead speed and while understanding the physics is very important, I am moving more and more to the biomechanics and observing the detailed angles that pros use. At this stage I will not provide advice to anyone until I can prove that I am correct. Keep up your observations.

Kevin Ryan

[Grasmere5]

7 hours ago, KevinRyan said:

Mygolfspy_TCB,

Thank you for your comments. You have made some interesting observations in your post about observing Pro golfers. At this stage I am still working to understand Clubhead speed and while understanding the physics is very important, I am moving more and more to the biomechanics and observing the detailed angles that pros use. At this stage I will not provide advice to anyone until I can prove that I am correct. Keep up your observations.

Kevin Ryan

How long does it take Kevin?

Can we help in your research even by trying what you think you’ve found out already?

There are only so many aspects to the swing, detailed angles and parts of the body we can control and because we are all physically different there will never be a perfect motion we can all achieve.

So what eg 5 or 10 points to focus on?

[Wildthing]

Hi Kevin,

Why not ask for advice and help from some of the more experienced biomechanic experts or golf scientists?  I saw a video a few years ago where a group of scientists were discussing golf biomechanics and one of them (I forget his name, but he did some work with NASA) mentioned the 'Ryke Effect' and wanted to learn more.

From a very simple physics perspective, can't we just infer that work is being done on the club by eccentric forces in a direction more along the shaft in the early downswing and then it's possible to use additional muscular lead forearm rotation to increase clubhead speed in a conical pendulum fashion in the late downswing?

One of Dr Sasho MacKenzie's research articles using a golf model showed a 22% increase in clubhead speed when the model 'forearm' torque generator was switched on (and its magnitude/timing optimised in the downswing) compared to an optimised swing without 'forearm torque'.  Whether there was a direct or indirect 'cause and effect' on clubhead speed is still debateable.

[KevinRyan]

11 hours ago, Wildthing said:

Hi Kevin,

Why not ask for advice and help from some of the more experienced biomechanic experts or golf scientists?  I saw a video a few years ago where a group of scientists were discussing golf biomechanics and one of them (I forget his name, but he did some work with NASA) mentioned the 'Ryke Effect' and wanted to learn more.

From a very simple physics perspective, can't we just infer that work is being done on the club by eccentric forces in a direction more along the shaft in the early downswing and then it's possible to use additional muscular lead forearm rotation to increase clubhead speed in a conical pendulum fashion in the late downswing?

One of Dr Sasho MacKenzie's research articles using a golf model showed a 22% increase in clubhead speed when the model 'forearm' torque generator was switched on (and its magnitude/timing optimised in the downswing) compared to an optimised swing without 'forearm torque'.  Whether there was a direct or indirect 'cause and effect' on clubhead speed is still debateable.

Wildthing and Grasmere5,

Let me answer both your posts with a macro observation. We have been led theoretically "by more experienced experts or golf scientists" for at least the last 30 years and as a result of their research, handicaps of ordinary golfers have not changed. I think we are now entitled to ask why:

1. Are their fundamental models correct?
2. Why hasn't their theories been able to be put into effect by the thousands of golf instructors who have been to their costly seminars.
3. Can we find one instructor who has a record of long term improvement of most of their students by 5-10 shots.
4. Maybe the age old system of peer review of academics by academics has not worked in understanding the fundamentals of the golf swing.
5. Maybe it is time that totally new models are developed and properly evaluated by the "more experienced experts", instead of the reactions I have had in the past, "you only have an engineering degree, what could you possibly teach a professor with a PHD."

My current research is very encouraging and when I am satisfied with my findings I will finish the book.

Kevin Ryan

 

[warbirdlover]

lag.  They have lag.

[Wildthing]

1. Why hasn't their theories been able to be put into effect by the thousands of golf instructors who have been to their costly seminars.

I'm not sure how many golf instructors actually understand the detailed biomechanics of the golf swing, especially from the kinetics perspective. It would mean they would need to learn some physics and maths which can be very non-intuitive and sometimes difficult to grasp. One thing I've learned from just trying to understand the biomechanics is that there are golf theories in the public domain that don't seem to make sense from a physics perspective. So if there are other golf instructors teaching golf mechanics using flawed science, they might also be damaging golfer's handicaps.

examples: 

Advanced Ball Striking - John Erickson

 

DST Golf

 

And probably many more.

PS.  The instruction might be useful promoting a feel but they use flawed science explanations on how to achieve those desired feels. 

Both the above golf instructors promote a positive hand torque at/through impact with lagging shaft bend (see image below). That seems to conflict with the reality of what is happening in a golf swing (at least for full swings using long clubs from 5-iron to Driver).

 

 

Edited October 6, 2022 by Wildthing