Re: Great Tips I Highly Recommend!
I agree, you can't argue your findings, nor can you argue physics. But is there any way from your machine to determine how fast the weight was transfered? Ie. it was 175% but .4 seconds later it was 10% and the front was 230% in the long hitters. And those that actively pushed and were able to get 250% of their weight on the back foot, but the transfer happend in .8 seconds, they didn't hit as far. Or some were able to get 800% of their weight but it took them 1 seoncd to transfer, but they hit it the furthest, as even though it took them the longest, they also had the most weight. So you would need to get data to compute weight transfer speed to amount of weight percentage. Do percentage so size isn't an issue, so someone weighing 100lbs and getting 200% at .4 seconds will have half the swing speed of a man 200lbs getting 200% at .4 seconds.
Unfotunatley the study Mike Austing did didn't show the percentage of weight of the person, rather it showed percentage of total weight balanced between both feet. So in the backswing when he said 80% of his the weight is on the back foot, that 80% could have been 200% of the persons weight.
You are looking at data... but not all of it. It would be interesting to see if how much weight they pushed down is of any importance at all, or if it is just a dependant variable on how fast one transferes their weight.
When I jump, I just try to jump, it is possible in this subconsious use of muscles, I am actually pushing down harder than I could if I tried to consiously push down. But I am thinking, if I tried to push down, I could do it harder than if I just tried to jump higher. That would show that how hard you push down is not a dependant variable on how high you jump.
This is something I am not sure of, though I know it is easier to do it more subconsiously than consiously and golf I wouldn't sacrifice accuracy and consistancy to get a bit more distance... if what you are saying is in fact true and I do not believe it is... though I have no scientific data to say either way, but it seems you might. That would be awesome if you could test this out.
Originally posted by Ringer
View Post
Unfotunatley the study Mike Austing did didn't show the percentage of weight of the person, rather it showed percentage of total weight balanced between both feet. So in the backswing when he said 80% of his the weight is on the back foot, that 80% could have been 200% of the persons weight.
You are looking at data... but not all of it. It would be interesting to see if how much weight they pushed down is of any importance at all, or if it is just a dependant variable on how fast one transferes their weight.
When I jump, I just try to jump, it is possible in this subconsious use of muscles, I am actually pushing down harder than I could if I tried to consiously push down. But I am thinking, if I tried to push down, I could do it harder than if I just tried to jump higher. That would show that how hard you push down is not a dependant variable on how high you jump.
This is something I am not sure of, though I know it is easier to do it more subconsiously than consiously and golf I wouldn't sacrifice accuracy and consistancy to get a bit more distance... if what you are saying is in fact true and I do not believe it is... though I have no scientific data to say either way, but it seems you might. That would be awesome if you could test this out.
Comment