![]() Not viable.Īdvantage is in feel at and after impact, where the clubhead "rebound" The shaft bend at impact is not in the direction of the CG. Gravity (CG), align the NBP with the CG - using the same rationale as The shaft bend at impact is in the vicinity of the clubhead's center of To produce the observed results of misalignment. Here - so far unanswered - is whether those forces are large enough Or NBP plane produces forces that tend to move the clubhead out of the The shaft bends during the downswing, any bend not in the spine plane Not in the target plane during the tens of milliseconds before impact. Unfortunately for the theory, the shaft bend is This is plausible, based on the assumption that the shaft bend is in The NBP in the target plane allows the hands to square the clubface at Offered with a sound physical rationale - and I could not find any. We examineįits the data perfectly, but some fit better than others.Īlign so that the direction the shaft 'wants' to bend is in the target There is no reason toĪre plenty of theories why spine alignment should work. On performance and/or feel), though hardly universal agreement on what alignmentīend without spine has no effect on performance. Is some experimental evidence that it works (that is, it has Performance when we align the shaft in the club?Īlignment" means having the spine and/or NBP face inĪ specific direction when the shaft is installed in the clubhead. FLOĭeflection works reliably, but is more tediousįinally we get to John's question: what are we doing to or for Significant impact on the direction the instrument finds. Notice without very careful measurement), then that bend has a The shaft has any residual bend (even too small a bend to ![]() Spine finders, sometimes called feel finders, don't work Heel/toe plane, and smaller bends in odd directions late in theīend at and just before impact is not neat enough - nor consistentĮnough from golfer to golfer - to be a factor in any simple rule for
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |