keltik1
* Ace Member *
I think we need to lock Blake, JR, and iacas in a mountain cabin for the winter and see what they hash out by next spring. I'll also take bets as to who gets killed first.
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
I'd do it. Let me check my calendar. Hmmm... It appears my first free winter is 2047. If we could do a half-winter, though, I can squeeze it in Dec-Jan 2042.keltik said:I think we need to lock Blake, JR, and iacas in a mountain cabin for the winter and see what they hash out by next spring. I'll also take bets as to who gets killed first.
Primarily:JR said:I have a guess about the reason why you're doing this and my advice is to keep at it. Don't give up because there are yahoos in the other place don't condemn us based on what they are doing.
I've got that video on my desktop right now, actually. And this image, which I just made earlier today:JR said:You are asking so much that answering would entail a books worth of info. Most if not all disc golfers are shocked to see their throws in slow motion because they thought they were doing one thing and then they see what they are really doing. Disc golf is really cool and so are many people in it. Here is some slow motion pivoting from a video that two nobodies made with a world champion with two 3x world champions as spotters and crowd controllers.
Thanks. I will do that (eventually... as much as I want to not work, you know how it goes... ).JR said:So with these kind of people in the game how can you go wrong? So keep at it and i'll reply to some of your points later i got cold from throwing today and am getting shivers. By the way check out the other vids from the same channel and the channel citysmasher1 for Bradley explaining many things well.
Thanks. I didn't want to shut out the thoughts on the "visual" thing Blake mentioned earlier. I'm not sure what he meant. With a full reach-back players aren't looking at the target the whole time, so that's not what he meant. I'm hoping he comes back and shares some thoughts on that. I don't know what it is. Maybe it's almost the same as "Steady Head" in the golf 5SK - maintaining a constant head height or something. I'm hoping to hear more about it.JR said:the most given advice here revolves around the most important things all the best players have in common. So we're right with you with the keys and Blake has preached that probably from when this site was created and most seem to have benefited from it so we sure get where you're coming from.
Thank you. It sounds like a great study and I'm really interested in the data. Hopefully this is the start of a trend for more analysis of the throwing motion(s) of the game's best.JR said:There's a video on Youtube with Christian Sandström, the Jenkins siblings and Nate Doss visiting the Swedish top athlete studying center with all sorts of measurements. Avery and Dave did blue suite measurements when they were at the university of Oregon but i don't know about release of the data. Mister Carlsen from Norway did his thesis of top Norwegian players driving and he measured them with 8 computer controlled 280 FPS cameras IIRC. I translated the most important parts in:
http://discgolfreview.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4019&hilit=thesis
JR said:I know you asked about much more but seeing as you like to study the details i anticipate objections and follow up questions so lets limit the topics for manageable post lengths for now. Possibly ;-)
All I'm saying is that people can't see the target line from their reach-back stage. If 99.9%+ of advanced disc golfers acquire visual aim at a certain point in the throwing motion, then I'd include it. Otherwise, it's not a commonality, it's a preference, and thus not a Key.JR said:One Feldy does not exclude it from being usable and common. I have no data on how common visual aiming is though and especially for which line. I'm not willing to limit teaching to just commonalities when there is a better alternative. And adding visual aiming on top of the other methods produces very real benefits.
iacas said:All I'm saying is that people can't see the target line from their reach-back stage. If 99.9%+ of advanced disc golfers acquire visual aim at a certain point in the throwing motion, then I'd include it. Otherwise, it's not a commonality, it's a preference, and thus not a Key.JR said:One Feldy does not exclude it from being usable and common. I have no data on how common visual aiming is though and especially for which line. I'm not willing to limit teaching to just commonalities when there is a better alternative. And adding visual aiming on top of the other methods produces very real benefits.
You can disagree with that if you'd like, and I've got no problem with that. But I could name a bunch of "preferences" in golf too that don't become Keys just because a particular instructor or group of players or whatever happen to like them and have good results. If that's the case it's more of an advanced trick or something than a Key.
But since I really am not sure what you mean by this visual stuff, we might be talking about two very different things for all I know.
Setup is not a key, no. I think perhaps you jumped in to the conversation late and skimmed or didn't read the earlier posts. I think my first post talks a bit about why this is not a "Key" (simple version: it's nowhere near a commonality among golfers, nor is it really measurable). It's a preference, and different people will have different setups.mikes919 said:One of the big keys in ball golf is your setup, your body position at address.
This is for all BH throws, some of which don't have any steps or approaches. "Balance" would be under "weight forward" (done properly).mikes919 said:1. Controlled and balanced X-step approach
Covered in the OAT Key.mikes919 said:2. Throwing motion on plane with intended flight path
We agree.mikes919 said:3. Weight forward
Kind of being discussed...mikes919 said:4. Wrist snap
Rolled into plane of disc control (nose AND wing).mikes919 said:5. Nose control
Contributions are welcome, but (to be blunt) you didn't contribute anything because you didn't seem to read any of the earlier posts.mikes919 said:Alright, sorry for trying to contribute. Sounds like you've got it all figured out.
FWIW we don't have "balance" in our golf's 5SK because if you maintain a Steady Head and do Weight Forward properly you remain in balance. It's a sub-component of a few Keys, basically, and it strikes me as being similar in disc golf, especially since balance is not entirely accurate in disc golf - you can't freeze at every position and maintain it, unmoving, like in golf. The very act of walking can be described as "falling and catching yourself repeatedly."JR said:mikes919 has a definite point that should be included in the keys list in that it is common across all good players that you step lightly, not flat footed and that results in good balance,
I think that would be included in the key about accelerating pivot (which has a *terrible* name currently). Can less flexible players turn their shoulders and chest 180° away from the target? Or are they better off turning back a bit less? I don't know.JR said:the ability to reach back far enough for great distance (another commonality among the majority with Uli and Scott Martin being the notable exceptions and Anthon being a halfway mark).
So which of the five Keys here would you eliminate? Rename and re-purpose? What, given the discussion, would your Keys be (whether there are 3, 4, 5, 8, or 9 or whatever):JR said:A light stepping run also allows proper body positions and timing. Because there are three exceptions limiting their absolute maximum distance in favor of more control, which is more important, it doesn't mean that their conscious choice does not mean it is crucial to reach back far for best distance. Which was the only statistically significant finding in the thesis of Carlsen. It is absolutely crucial to a disc golf throw to step without being flat footed and reaching back far for distance and warrants the title key. I am not proficient in golf so i can't comment on analogies on that side but this is for disc golf right? So if those are one or two keys is a matter of taste and if you can lump one or both under some label with other stuff fine. My only argument is that they are both common enough and influential enough to throwing competitively that the term key should be pondered and debated carefully.
If that's the case, I'd probably consider it not a Key. As I've said, Keys have to be achievable, measurable, and an almost absolute commonality among the game's best. If you can easily name two people who aren't doing them, it's likely not a Key.JR said:Contrast this: Steve Brinster and lately more and more it would seem Mike Moser seem to breaking key #1 all the time
I disagree. Remember, the Keys do not exclude expert disc golfers who have "personality" or "quirks." This guy has all five of the golf Keys despite the backswing you'll see here:JR said:So i posit that even though there may be exceptions among top players to any keys it does not mean that they aren't proficient enough to be able to be top performers thanks to other traits.
Then they aren't "Keys" as I've defined them. Keys are absolute requirements and virtually absolute commonalities. Improving a Key should result in improving your motion and consequently your disc golf.JR said:So that shows how some keys aren't absolutely vital to performing well if you're good enough in other ways to compensate.
I don't think there are as many different throwing styles as you think, when you break it down to actual Keys. I could show you golf swings that look almost nothing alike and have all sorts of differences, but they absolutely peg each of the 5 Simple Keys to golf. That's what makes them Keys. "Personality" or "quirks" or whatever aren't Keys.JR said:If there were hard and fast requirements to throwing well which i think you were aiming for there would not be so many different throwing styles.
If you think golf is somehow united in how it teaches, you really haven't talked to golf instructors much. Golf instruction is a mess. People out there don't even know the basic physics of what causes the ball to fly the way it does. Butch Harmon teaches players to keep the same flex in their back knee throughout their swing despite a) him not doing it himself in his own swing, and b) almost no top players doing it in their swings. And the "evidence" is simply using your eyes to watch, yet he won't do that.JR said:A different perspective is to think that it is very probable that disc golf has not had enough scientific study with widely available measured data to show the superiority of any form part so training and coaching is much trial and error with methods and individuals varying.
I'd disagree, but at the same time, know that I realize I may be "forcing" the Keys the way I've defined them on to disc golf when really there might only be one Key, or two (I think Keys #4 and #5, and probably #1, are sure things, albeit perhaps with slightly different titles). Maybe there's too much variety in disc golf stances, shots, etc. In golf for example you make the same motion for a 300-yard shot as you do for one that's 120 yards - you just change clubs. That's not quite the same in disc golf.JR said:So not much has been solidified yet because there is not enough overwhelming evidence about many issues. From that position i'd say developing keys is probably a work in progress for years to come with a moving target and unclear boundaries between keys and what makes the keys keys.
Just to be clear again, personal preferences aren't Keys. Jim Furyk has all 5SK in golf as did Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods despite how vastly different their swings looked, the fact that they used different equipment, etc.JR said:And what should be done about the keys training and playing wise. Analysis in disc golf has only one leg over the side of the crib at this point and the results have rarely been shared to the public. Add semantics and bias, personal preferences etc. and you have a good base for an explanation into why so many wildy differing styles exist.
I'd be very interested in reading that thread if it should come to you sometime! Thanks!JR said:I think Blake has listed some commonalities among top players here earlier. I seem to recall the figure 7 and that he didn't name all of them. No remembrance about in which thread it was. I think that's over a year ago.
Again, perhaps this would be easier to discuss with someone who was familiar with both golf and disc golf, and maybe I'm "forcing" Keys on disc golf when really there aren't very many true commonalities, but until I'm convinced of that I'm going to keep pushing onward with this.JR said:If you inserted what a researcher or developer of research methods would say of personal bias, semantics and whatnot you might not be so eager to try to squeeze reality to fit into a box labeled a key.
Five things do in a golf swing.JR said:IME few things fit into any kind of box.
That really doesn't seem to have much to do with the topic, though, JR. Impact lasts 400 microseconds in the golf swing but we can still comprehend it - quite easily, in fact - as well as the motions that lead up to it, and compensations, and so on. The golf swing involves pieces moving faster than in disc golf and with greater degrees of accuracy.JR said:Reality seems to way shiftier than the boxes people use to help their thinking. Too bad the laws of nature do not seem to swayed by our perceptions and short hand for thinking. The brain can be incredibly slow in some operations so we have a built in weakness to cut corners when it comes to thinking and perceiving with our limited system.
I know. I appreciate it.JR said:I'm being a bit advocatey :-D
Again, "visual" measurements suffice as well. We don't need to understand the intricate physics of what causes a disc to fly, we can be content to know that having 80% of your weight on your front foot is better than having 50% of your weight over each foot at release.JR said:And i'm not so sure we can jump to conclusions with this little measured results in this sport.
No, those aren't the "Keys" as I've defined them a few times. That's just physics. I don't have to know what causes a golf ball to come off the clubface at 1.48 times the speed of the clubhead at the moment of contact, I just have to know that if I did measure that, 1.48 would be pretty darn good for a driver and virtually impossible with, say, a 6-iron.JR said:If you want to go into science and proveable repeatable things then the keys are force equals mass times acceleration and kinetic energy equals half the mass time the square of velocity.
It is, I agree.JR said:If you don't go into Einstein and later that showed that Newton couldn't explain everything in astrophysics. And people have much more inventions after Einstein. And i'm way out of my league with physics. More on this later but i'm not derailing this into philosophy of science because i don't consider myself to be competent enough in teaching research methods and it is off topic.
That's not even really worth a response. "Movement" is too general. Dancing is moving, but it's not going to make you a better disc golfer.JR said:So if i were to hazard a guess as to what could stand up to studying by scientists as a key i am fairly comfortable in naming moving. Standing still needs a pretty stiff wind to get the disc out of your hand but how do you aim the wind? If you don't create it yourself Anything more is subject to debate i'm afraid so at this point i need to leave things for later. I'm not sure even about your definitions for a key being proper to do the job right.
I disagree entirely that "it takes a book." I am not sure you really grasp what I'm striving for, and I'll take the blame for that, at not communicating it clearly.JR said:And if they aren't i'm not sure if i'm competent enough or informed enough to lay down the criteria. So if we were thinking in terms of practical abstractions that are close enough to work with with caveats then it would be easier to do what you are attempting. I'm not trying to be a brake. A person contradicting and stopping everything. I'm doing this to get practical results out of naming the keys turned into practice and playing. And so far i think we have some disagreements. More on what differences and why i have differing opinions later. The problem is that commenting on everything takes a book. Really way too long posts and more issues pop up than i can address in a day. Or a few.