The clubhead is never directed towards an endpoint called "low point" in a full golf swing. The club is swung through low point to a full finish. Low point is merely the nadir of the clubhead arc. As it reaches the nadir of its clubhead arc, the clubhead is moving level and its path must have a direction - which is at a tangent to the clubhead arc at low point.
Jeff.
Never said it was directed towards an endpoint and stays there i'm not quite that stupid. The lowpoint is the lowest point it doesn't go any lower, the end of it's travel to that point,but it's just a point with no direction.
Last Edit: Sept 19, 2010 14:59:19 GMT -5 by nothere
Post by imperfectgolfer on Sept 19, 2010 15:03:47 GMT -5
A clubhead is moving in three directions in the downswing - downward, and outward and forward. If it reaches low point, it may not be going more downward and outward, but it is still moving forward - which means that it still has a direction of travel.
A clubhead is moving in three directions in the downswing - downward, and outward and forward. If it reaches low point, it may not be going more downward and outward, but it is still moving forward - which means that it still has a direction of travel.
Jeff.
Then that's after lowpoint. It can't go lower than the lowest point. I know it still travels after lowpoint in a different direction.
Post by imperfectgolfer on Sept 19, 2010 15:15:57 GMT -5
It obviously cannot go lower than low point, but it is still in forward motion when it reaches low point - and it is not stationary when it reaches low point. If the clubhead is still in motion when it reaches low point, then it must have a direction.
It obviously cannot go lower than low point, but it is still in forward motion when it reaches low point - and it is not stationary when it reaches low point. If the clubhead is still in motion when it reaches low point, then it must have a direction.
Jeff.
It's touches lowpoint then it's doesn't touch on lowpoint, the actual lowpoint has no direction but the clubhead does, lowpoint doesn't move the clubhead does.
Post by imperfectgolfer on Sept 19, 2010 19:03:30 GMT -5
Consider Nothere's last post's amazing feat of logic that demonstrates that "low point has no direction because it doesn't move", That logic could also theoretically be applied to any point on the clubhead's arc-path. The clubhead bypasses all those "points", but they don't move - so they have no direction.
Consider Nothere's last post's amazing feat of logic that demonstrates that "low point has no direction because it doesn't move", That logic could also theoretically be applied to any point on the clubhead's arc-path. The clubhead bypasses all those "points", but they don't move - so they have no direction.
Stunning logic!
Jeff.
Well Jeff, none of those other points are low point are they and your right none of all the other points move but the clubhead travels through them all, points in space makes perfect sense and Mike said lowpoint has no direction he didn't say the clubhead has no direction, like always you try and twist the statements to fit your argument.
"Stunning logic" if that's all you can come up with what can i learn from your vast and overwhelming knowledge.Show me proof in prose form that lowpoint" has a direction", which means" it must move", that's what has a direction means... right. Just admit your wrong and you'll be a bigger man for it.
I know it's hard to admit your wrong especially to someone from a different mental universe who is inferior to you, right.
Last Edit: Sept 19, 2010 19:24:37 GMT -5 by nothere
Post by Richie3Jack on Sept 19, 2010 19:44:59 GMT -5
Jeff,
Please watch the condescending tones. Given nothere's rebuttal to your post, I'll leave your post up for now, but the next time I'll delete it since it's a condescending remark that adds nothing to the thread.
Post by imperfectgolfer on Sept 19, 2010 20:55:38 GMT -5
Nothere wrote-: "none of those other points are low point are they and your right none of all the other points move but the clubhead travels through them all, points in space makes perfect sense and Mike said lowpoint has no direction he didn't say the clubhead has no direction."
I personally believe that no rational golfer thinks of any "point" located on the clubhead arc as having "direction" - other than in the sense that when the clubhead reaches that point, it is moving in a certain direction. So, when the clubhead reaches "points" on the descending limb of the clubhead arc, it is moving downwards-outwards-forwards. And, when the clubhead reaches "points" on the ascending limb of the clubhead arc, it is moving upwards-inwards-forwards. Finally, when the clubhead is transitioning between the descending and ascending limbs at low point, it is only moving forward. The word "forward" has a directional quality - towards the target (if the tangent [HSP] to the clubhead arc at low point is directed towards the target), or left-or-right of the target if the HSP is directed left-or-right of the target.
Post by mikestloc on Sept 19, 2010 21:04:05 GMT -5
look, guys....no offense....no tones.....no condescending - this thread is a perfect example of going nowhere.....
i officially retract "skew".....the "point has no direction" comment was an effort to poke fun about how ridiculous some of these debates can become....of course, i was right, but that's irrelevant....
the "show me proof in prose form that lowpoint has a direction" comment by nothere is an instant classic - at least in my book
i will no longer post here for fear of being bludgeoned to death by a oxford english dictionary.....you can catch my slow witted comments which usually piggyback brian's brilliance over at his forum.....
i hope the book literalists show up in force in phoenix - gmbtempe and all his compatriots....i can't wait to see the looks on their faces
i hope the book literalists show up in force in phoenix - gmbtempe and all his compatriots....i can't wait to see the looks on their faces
I barely understand the book just trying to learn. I know one thing, it least makes more scientific sense then all the other garbage I tried to learn from till I got to it (guys like Dean Reinmith(sp), Jim McLean, Hank Haney).
"The only real shortcuts are more and more know how"...TGM
Post by Richie3Jack on Sept 19, 2010 21:47:13 GMT -5
This thread is going to be locked because people cannot follow the rules.
1. I would hardly call gmbtempe a book literalist. Just because somebody disagrees with your thoughts, Mike and even if they disagree and argue in favor of TGM doesn't make them a 'book literalist.'
2. Getting offended because somebody disagrees with you and then declaring you'll just go back to your 'home' forum is incredibly weak. Instead of being able to refute your critic's claims, you just take your ball and go home. On other forums I read I'm always more impressed with the instructor who can refute those claims with facts and/or logic rather than those who get upset and stop posting. I prefer the instructors who have the ability to stick to their guns because they can back up their beliefs and theories or if they can't, they can understand where their beliefs and theories may be flawed or they need to understand more about them so they can get better at what they do.
3. 'Skews the path' is a deceptive term. Much like if I told somebody that I saw somebody sprinting down the street when they were actually jogging. It's hardly a horrible offense in the world of golf forums and instruction, but confusing and deceptive nonetheless and I don't find it nitpicky either. Just something that should be a little more accurate.