GCA Boomerang 2011 - thoughts, memories, pictures etc.

[Scott Coan]

Here's my guess...  this is not the backswing but obviously the downswing.  Kyle has got some serious pipes and he's coming into this shot with a bit of force.  I can only presume that the flex in this particular club is far too weak for the force that has been imparted on the downswing transition and the clubhead has raced out in front as a result.

[Duncan Betts]

Interesting discussion.

I would have 4,6 and 15 as the best holes on the course - yet we have people here talking them down.

Whats not to like about 4?  There are too many viable options off the tee to count, and if you really think the bunker has too much sand(!) then, don't take it on.  You can hit an 8 iron off the tee and still have a 9 iron in if you really want to be conservative, and it won't be a blind approach.  Once you actually get to the green, there is still plenty of fun to be had and many options to get the ball to certain pin locations, all of them quite understandable, and all with their own set of challenges.  #4 Barnbougle is one of the best holes I've ever encountered, its the most fun you can have on a golf hole in Australia.

6 is just brilliant use of land and natural features, and who would have thought a bunkerless green could be so difficult and have such a variety in preferred angles, depending on the pin?  The drive has more strategy to it than appears at first glance and the recovery options around the green are difficult yet interesting.

then we come to 15, and this is also the first time I've ever encountered critiicism of this hole either.  Options off the tee, dramatic and brilliant green complex, little features that reveal themselves on repeat play that continue to add complexity to the hole everytime you play it.   Whats not to like?  The last 100m walking towards that green is about as good as it gets.  While it has no resemblence to the 3rd at RMW, it has the same wonderment as you walk towards it and admire the brillance of the green and the questions it asks of you.

I can understand criticisms of holes like #11, #16 and to a lesser extent the drives at #8 and #17 - but these are just minor quibbles.  However questions about the quality of #4 and #15 in particular are somewhat surprising to say the least.

Jason,

I don't believe that is an optical illusion.

[David_Elvins]

Very well put Duncan,

Scott's description of 15 being a simple 3 wood/rescue and wedge, and Kevin's claim that the 4th has too much sand in the bunker and would be better if it was a series of smaller bunkers do little for the prevailing view that NSWwlshman just don't get Golf Course Architecture.      Although I am sure that both will come around with another viewing.  The next trip cant come soon enough.  

[Scott Warren]

David E:

Scott's description of 15 being a simple 3 wood/rescue and wedge

Not sure I actually ever said that. What I do recall saying is that I didn't feel tempted to hit driver, nor did I think there looked to be all that much benefit from being 30-50m short rather than 80-100.

The next trip cant come soon enough.

That's one thing we can agree on!

[Kevin Pallier]

Scott's description of 15 being a simple 3 wood/rescue and wedge, and Kevin's claim that the 4th has too much sand in the bunker and would be better if it was a series of smaller bunkers do little for the prevailing view that NSWwlshman just don't get Golf Course Architecture.      Although I am sure that both will come around with another viewing.  The next trip cant come soon enough.  

David

Are you getting bored in the USA and have taking up fishing?   

I saw a pic today of a large selection of the 4th bunker collapsing in on itself only a few days after we left there. I wonder what the hole will be like if the comment that Richard Sattler relayed to us is the philosophy that is steadfastly adopted in relation to it ?

[Bill Brightly]

I am fascinated by this picture.  If this is an optical illusion can anyone explain how such an illusion could be created?

I agree with Jason, I need to know how this shaft bends this way! Kyle's knees are going forward, so it is in the downswing. The only way the shaft could bend like this would appear to be if he completed stopped his arms at hip level and flipped the clubhead.

I'll say this, thank God it is not a picture of me, I would never be able to hit another shot!

[Garland Bayley]

I am fascinated by this picture.  If this is an optical illusion can anyone explain how such an illusion could be created?

I agree with Jason, I need to know how this shaft bends this way! Kyle's knees are going forward, so it is in the downswing. The only way the shaft could bend like this would appear to be if he completed stopped his arms at hip level and flipped the clubhead.

I'll say this, thank God it is not a picture of me, I would never be able to hit another shot!

It would appear that the wrists are not maintaining a cock that they should on the downswing. So stopping the club on the downswing would release the wrists some and the momentum of the club head would bend the shaft down.

Since the wrists look like they are in back swing position, he would have to have the fastest take away on earth to obtain such bend. So, I to am going with the downswing theory.

[Patrick Kiser]

Garland,

When you remove the pic and reread your first sentence out of context ... well, let's just say you're one sick pup  .

[Eric Smith]

It's a lens thing I'm pretty sure guys. Any chance this was taken with an iPhone? I have a photo from a round last summer where my friend's club is doing the exact same thing before impact. It's crazy looking to see the shaft flexing like a wet spaghetti noodle!

Edit -- Found it:

[Ben Sims]

It's not an illusion or massive strength--as much as Kyle probably wants you guys to think anyway. 

You load a golf shaft by transitioning from your backswing to the downswing.  Once the shaft is "loaded", it rebounds.  Some faster than others due to flex profile and stiffness. 

If you look at the Tour players in a still photo at the bottom of their downswings (at the ball), you'll see forward shaft flex (rebound) almost perfectly aligned with the impact zone.  That comes from fancy launch monitors and tons of tech data and frequency matching; the ability to match a shaft's rebound flex to the bottom of the golf swing. 

[Tom Yost]

I've been told that the anomaly pictured is an effect of the moving shutter.  I suppose one could test that theory by using an open shutter and exposing with a flash.

[Garland Bayley]

It's not an illusion or massive strength--as much as Kyle probably wants you guys to think anyway. 

You load a golf shaft by transitioning from your backswing to the downswing.  Once the shaft is "loaded", it rebounds.  Some faster than others due to flex profile and stiffness. 

If you look at the Tour players in a still photo at the bottom of their downswings (at the ball), you'll see forward shaft flex (rebound) almost perfectly aligned with the impact zone.  That comes from fancy launch monitors and tons of tech data and frequency matching; the ability to match a shaft's rebound flex to the bottom of the golf swing. 

NAH, I don't think so.

[Garland Bayley]

It's a lens thing I'm pretty sure guys. Any chance this was taken with an iPhone? I have a photo from a round last summer where my friend's club is doing the exact same thing before impact. It's crazy looking to see the shaft flexing like a wet spaghetti noodle!

Edit -- Found it:

Well he still has the cock in his wrists, but the shaft sure looks limp. I am now inclined to agree with Eric on it being a camera thing. Sometimes the stuff Jobs produces just blows.

[Ben Sims]

It's not an illusion or massive strength--as much as Kyle probably wants you guys to think anyway. 

You load a golf shaft by transitioning from your backswing to the downswing.  Once the shaft is "loaded", it rebounds.  Some faster than others due to flex profile and stiffness. 

If you look at the Tour players in a still photo at the bottom of their downswings (at the ball), you'll see forward shaft flex (rebound) almost perfectly aligned with the impact zone.  That comes from fancy launch monitors and tons of tech data and frequency matching; the ability to match a shaft's rebound flex to the bottom of the golf swing. 

NAH, I don't think so.

Okay.  Sounded good. 

[Kyle Henderson]

From now on, I'm going have my caddie hold my bag in front of the swing cameras...

For the record, I hit a 9-iron and it landed within 10 feet of the pin. 




(Tear)

[Matthew Delahunty]

Some more of my photos - Friday afternoon at Barnbougle

Kyle Henderson and Michael Taylor survey 1




Looking back at 3


4






5

[Matthew Delahunty]

8




9


From the ridge on 11


13

[Matthew Delahunty]

14




15





From 15th tee looking to Lost Farm 5th green

[Bill Brightly]

Same spot as above, glancing right. Not a golf hole, but I just like the look!

[Joe Perches]

I am fascinated by this picture.  If this is an optical illusion can anyone explain how such an illusion could be created?

Digital cameras are not like using a film camera.

This particular one uses a top to bottom scan.  It's called a rolling shutter.
Each horizontal line of the picture is taken a few microseconds after the line above it.

The clubhead and a portion of the shaft have advanced in the lower portion of the picture relative to his hands.

There are a bunch of pictures like this and an explanation here:
http://www.dvxuser.com/jason/CMOS-CCD/
 

[Bill Brightly]

Joe,

OK, I buy that explanation of the photo, but wouldn't the shadow on the ground be different by the time that "line" of the picture was taken?

[Joe Perches]

OK, I buy that explanation of the photo, but wouldn't the shadow on the ground be different by the time that "line" of the picture was taken?

Hi Bill.

It is different.

Remember the angle of the sun and the initial position of his hands on the shadow.  Then look at the shadowed hands and clubhead positions.

The club is still flexing apparently inappropriately, just not as much because the time delay between the hands position and the clubhead position is shorter (fewer vertical lines) in the shadow.

cheers, Joe

[Kyle Henderson]

The club is still flexing apparently inappropriately, just not as much because the time delay between the hands position and the clubhead position is shorter (fewer vertical lines) in the shadow.

cheers, Joe

Brett asked me to slow down my swing through impact to allow for the limitations of his camera. Bruce Lee did the same thing while shooting "Enter The Dragon."

You should see how far I can hit it with a 1-inch backswing.

[James Bennett]

Okay, a dozen pictures from day 1 (mainly am).  I'll try not to duplicate other people's pictures.

1.  The night before.  A tempting view of #9 from 'the lodgings'.


2.  An early morning wake-up call from the locals.

"What was that Skippy, the greenstaff have cut the hole on #4 on the rhs, so use the rhs bowl to feed the ball?  Thanks Skip"  (ps my name is not Sunny, although Pup could easily be mistaken for Sunny!)


3.  The opponents - Bill Brightly and Wayne Freeman.  Mark Ferguson and I were the muppets today.


4.  Bill Brightly on #7, 'The little devil'.  The ball is at the top of the picture.  An easy birdie on the '10%' hole.


5.  Bill Brightly's ball next to the pin


6.  Wayne Freeman playing from #9 tee.  Wayne is a fierce competitor.


7.  The group in front having fun on #13 and a back pin - the Sitwell Park green


8. BD #14 photographs really well in the morning.


9. A fivesome playing behind the GCA'ers in the afternoon (BD #3).  The course was full, and play was slow.  A rare occurrence.


10. Getting later in the afternoon - BD #17 from BD#13 tee.  It is my attempt at an Aidan Bradley Irish pic.  3 out of 10 I think.


11. A glimpse of tomorrow - LF #4 from BD #16 blue tee (high on the hill)


12.  36 holes and a several hour dinner/talk with Richard Sattler.  It was a long first day!


James B

[Bill Brightly]

James,

Great pics!

Thanks for posting my first Australian birdie (after being shut out at NSW and RM.) Just goes to show that you don't really need a good looking swing!

And I noticed that you were a bit of a competitor yourself...your match came down to matching 6 foot putts on 18 and Wayne happened to make his!