Analysis of the delivery plane in the golf swing using 1 principal components

Andrew Morrison, Denise McGrath, Eric Wallace

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Although the swing plane has been a popular area of golf biomechanics research, the movement of the club relative to the swing plane has yet to be shown experimentally to have a relationship with performance. This study used principal component and subsequent multiple regression analysis to investigate the relationship between the movement of the club relative to the delivery plane and clubhead characteristics at ball impact. The principal components generally reflected deviations from an individual swing plane, and lower values of these were associated generally with less variability in the club face impact location. Given a situation in which a golf coach wishes to improve the precision of ball striking, the results from this study suggest that both simplicity of the route and alignment of the club to the final trajectory before impact could be a course of action. However, this does not to suggest 19 technique should be based on a ‘model’ swing plane.
LanguageEnglish
Pages1-10
JournalProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology
Volume0
Early online date19 Jan 2018
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 19 Jan 2018

Fingerprint

club
coach
regression analysis
performance

Keywords

  • Motion analysis
  • kinematics
  • performance
  • techniques
  • golf swing

Cite this

@article{b617ae316345463bafd3af171fde0a56,
title = "Analysis of the delivery plane in the golf swing using 1 principal components",
abstract = "Although the swing plane has been a popular area of golf biomechanics research, the movement of the club relative to the swing plane has yet to be shown experimentally to have a relationship with performance. This study used principal component and subsequent multiple regression analysis to investigate the relationship between the movement of the club relative to the delivery plane and clubhead characteristics at ball impact. The principal components generally reflected deviations from an individual swing plane, and lower values of these were associated generally with less variability in the club face impact location. Given a situation in which a golf coach wishes to improve the precision of ball striking, the results from this study suggest that both simplicity of the route and alignment of the club to the final trajectory before impact could be a course of action. However, this does not to suggest 19 technique should be based on a ‘model’ swing plane.",
keywords = "Motion analysis, kinematics, performance, techniques, golf swing",
author = "Andrew Morrison and Denise McGrath and Eric Wallace",
note = "Reference text: 1. Jenkins S. Golf coaching and swing plane theories. Int J Sports Sci Coa 2007; 2: 1–24. 2. Haney H. The only golf lesson you’ll ever need: easy solutions to problem golf swings. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1999. 3. Hardy J and Andrisani J. The plane truth for golfers: breaking down the one-plane swing and the two-plane swing and finding the one that’s right for you. New York: McGraw-Hill Contemporary, 2005. 4. Kelley H. The golfing machine: the star system of G.O.L.F., geometrically oriented linear force. 4th rev ed. Seattle, WA: Star System Press, 1979. 5. Coleman S and Anderson D. An examination of the planar nature of golf club motion in the swings of experienced players. J Sport Sci 2007; 25: 739–748. 6. Kwon Y-H, Como CS, Singhal K, et al. Assessment of planarity of the golf swing based on the functional swing plane of the clubhead and motion planes of the body points. Sport Biomech 2012; 11: 127–148. 7. Morrison A, McGrath D and Wallace ES. Changes in club head trajectory and planarity throughout the golf swing. Procedia Engineer 2014; 72: 144–149. 8. Morrison A, McGrath D and Wallace ES. The relationship between the golf swing plane and ball impact characteristics using trajectory ellipse fitting. J Sport Sci 2018; 36: 303–310. 9. The Professional Golfers Association (PGA). PGA study guide: golf coaching I. Palm Beach Gardens, Sutton Coldfield, UK: PGA, 2012. 10. Wiren G. The PGA manual of golf: the professional’s way to play better golf. New York: Hungry Minds, Inc., 1991. 11. Brown SJ, Nevill AM, Monk SA, et al. Determination of the swing technique characteristics and performance outcome relationship in golf driving for low handicap female golfers. J Sport Sci 2011; 29: 1483–1491. 12. Chu Y, Sell CT and Lephart S. The relationship between biomechanical variables and driving performance during the golf swing. J Sport Sci 2010; 28: 1251–1259. 13. Harper TE, Roberts JR and Jones R. Driver swingweighting: a worthwhile process? Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture 2005; 219: 385–393. 14. Field A. Discovering statistics using SPSS. 3rd ed. London: SAGE, 2009. 15. Betzler NF, Monk SA, Wallace ES, et al. Variability in clubhead presentation characteristics and ball impact location for golfers’ drives. J Sport Sci 2012; 30: 439–448. 16. Betzler NF, Monk SA, Wallace ES, et al. The relationships between driver clubhead presentation characteristics, ball launch conditions and golf shot outcomes. Proc IMechE, Part P: J Sports Engineering and Technology 2014; 228: 242–249. 17. Giakas G, Baltzopoulos V and Bartlett R. Improved extrapolation techniques in recursive digital filtering: a comparison of least squares and prediction. J Biomech 1997; 31: 87–91. 18. Vint PF and Hinrichs RN. Endpoint error in smoothing and differentiating raw kinematic data: an evaluation of four popular methods. J Biomech 1996; 29: 1637–1642. 19. Winter DA. Biomechanics and motor control of human movement. 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2009. 20. Jorgensen TP. The physics of golf. 2nd ed. New York: Springer, 1999. 21. Hocknell A, Jones R and Rothberg S. Experimental analysis of impacts with large elastic deformation: I. Linear motion. Meas Sci Technol 1999; 7: 1247. 22. Tuxen F. Optimization of driving distance – importance of determining the attack angle. In: Crews D and Lutz R (eds) Science and golf V: proceedings of the fifth world scientific congress of golf. Mesa, AZ: Energy in Motion, Inc., 2008, pp.469–476. 23. Brandon SCE, Graham RB, Almosnino S, et al. Interpreting principal components in biomechanics: representative extremes and single component reconstruction. J Electromyogr Kines 2013; 23: 1304–1310. 24. Stevens JP. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. 4th ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2002. 25. Horan SA, Evans K and Kavanagh JJ. Movement variability in the golf swing of male and female skilled golfers. Med Sci Sport Exer 2011; 43: 1474–1483. 26. Morrison A, McGrath D and Wallace ES. Motor abundance and control structure in the golf swing. Hum Movement Sci 2016; 46: 129–147. 27. Glazier P, Davids K and Bartlett R. Dynamical systems theory: a relevant framework for performanceorientated sports biomechanics research. Sportscience 2003; 7: 1–8. 28. Glazier P. Movement variability in the golf swing: theoretical, methodological, and practical issues. Res Q Exercise Sport 2011; 82: 157–161. 29. Knight CA. Neuromotor issues in the learning and control of golf skill. Res Q Exercise Sport 2004; 75: 9–15. 30. Langdown BL, Bridge M and Li F-X. Movement variability in the golf swing. Sport Biomech 2012; 11: 273–287. 31. The Professional Golfers Association (PGA). PGA study guide: introduction to golf coaching. Palm Beach Gardens, Sutton Coldfield, UK: PGA, 2012. 32. McHardy A, Pollard H and Bayley G. A comparison of the modern and classic golf swing: a clinician’s perspective. S Afr J Sports Med 2006; 18: 80–91. 33. Hogan B. Ben Hogan’s five lessons: the modern fundamentals of golf. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1957.",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "19",
doi = "10.1177/1754337117751729",
language = "English",
volume = "0",
pages = "1--10",
journal = "Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology",
issn = "1754-3371",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Analysis of the delivery plane in the golf swing using 1 principal components

AU - Morrison, Andrew

AU - McGrath, Denise

AU - Wallace, Eric

N1 - Reference text: 1. Jenkins S. Golf coaching and swing plane theories. Int J Sports Sci Coa 2007; 2: 1–24. 2. Haney H. The only golf lesson you’ll ever need: easy solutions to problem golf swings. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1999. 3. Hardy J and Andrisani J. The plane truth for golfers: breaking down the one-plane swing and the two-plane swing and finding the one that’s right for you. New York: McGraw-Hill Contemporary, 2005. 4. Kelley H. The golfing machine: the star system of G.O.L.F., geometrically oriented linear force. 4th rev ed. Seattle, WA: Star System Press, 1979. 5. Coleman S and Anderson D. An examination of the planar nature of golf club motion in the swings of experienced players. J Sport Sci 2007; 25: 739–748. 6. Kwon Y-H, Como CS, Singhal K, et al. Assessment of planarity of the golf swing based on the functional swing plane of the clubhead and motion planes of the body points. Sport Biomech 2012; 11: 127–148. 7. Morrison A, McGrath D and Wallace ES. Changes in club head trajectory and planarity throughout the golf swing. Procedia Engineer 2014; 72: 144–149. 8. Morrison A, McGrath D and Wallace ES. The relationship between the golf swing plane and ball impact characteristics using trajectory ellipse fitting. J Sport Sci 2018; 36: 303–310. 9. The Professional Golfers Association (PGA). PGA study guide: golf coaching I. Palm Beach Gardens, Sutton Coldfield, UK: PGA, 2012. 10. Wiren G. The PGA manual of golf: the professional’s way to play better golf. New York: Hungry Minds, Inc., 1991. 11. Brown SJ, Nevill AM, Monk SA, et al. Determination of the swing technique characteristics and performance outcome relationship in golf driving for low handicap female golfers. J Sport Sci 2011; 29: 1483–1491. 12. Chu Y, Sell CT and Lephart S. The relationship between biomechanical variables and driving performance during the golf swing. J Sport Sci 2010; 28: 1251–1259. 13. Harper TE, Roberts JR and Jones R. Driver swingweighting: a worthwhile process? Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture 2005; 219: 385–393. 14. Field A. Discovering statistics using SPSS. 3rd ed. London: SAGE, 2009. 15. Betzler NF, Monk SA, Wallace ES, et al. Variability in clubhead presentation characteristics and ball impact location for golfers’ drives. J Sport Sci 2012; 30: 439–448. 16. Betzler NF, Monk SA, Wallace ES, et al. The relationships between driver clubhead presentation characteristics, ball launch conditions and golf shot outcomes. Proc IMechE, Part P: J Sports Engineering and Technology 2014; 228: 242–249. 17. Giakas G, Baltzopoulos V and Bartlett R. Improved extrapolation techniques in recursive digital filtering: a comparison of least squares and prediction. J Biomech 1997; 31: 87–91. 18. Vint PF and Hinrichs RN. Endpoint error in smoothing and differentiating raw kinematic data: an evaluation of four popular methods. J Biomech 1996; 29: 1637–1642. 19. Winter DA. Biomechanics and motor control of human movement. 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2009. 20. Jorgensen TP. The physics of golf. 2nd ed. New York: Springer, 1999. 21. Hocknell A, Jones R and Rothberg S. Experimental analysis of impacts with large elastic deformation: I. Linear motion. Meas Sci Technol 1999; 7: 1247. 22. Tuxen F. Optimization of driving distance – importance of determining the attack angle. In: Crews D and Lutz R (eds) Science and golf V: proceedings of the fifth world scientific congress of golf. Mesa, AZ: Energy in Motion, Inc., 2008, pp.469–476. 23. Brandon SCE, Graham RB, Almosnino S, et al. Interpreting principal components in biomechanics: representative extremes and single component reconstruction. J Electromyogr Kines 2013; 23: 1304–1310. 24. Stevens JP. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. 4th ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2002. 25. Horan SA, Evans K and Kavanagh JJ. Movement variability in the golf swing of male and female skilled golfers. Med Sci Sport Exer 2011; 43: 1474–1483. 26. Morrison A, McGrath D and Wallace ES. Motor abundance and control structure in the golf swing. Hum Movement Sci 2016; 46: 129–147. 27. Glazier P, Davids K and Bartlett R. Dynamical systems theory: a relevant framework for performanceorientated sports biomechanics research. Sportscience 2003; 7: 1–8. 28. Glazier P. Movement variability in the golf swing: theoretical, methodological, and practical issues. Res Q Exercise Sport 2011; 82: 157–161. 29. Knight CA. Neuromotor issues in the learning and control of golf skill. Res Q Exercise Sport 2004; 75: 9–15. 30. Langdown BL, Bridge M and Li F-X. Movement variability in the golf swing. Sport Biomech 2012; 11: 273–287. 31. The Professional Golfers Association (PGA). PGA study guide: introduction to golf coaching. Palm Beach Gardens, Sutton Coldfield, UK: PGA, 2012. 32. McHardy A, Pollard H and Bayley G. A comparison of the modern and classic golf swing: a clinician’s perspective. S Afr J Sports Med 2006; 18: 80–91. 33. Hogan B. Ben Hogan’s five lessons: the modern fundamentals of golf. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1957.

PY - 2018/1/19

Y1 - 2018/1/19

N2 - Although the swing plane has been a popular area of golf biomechanics research, the movement of the club relative to the swing plane has yet to be shown experimentally to have a relationship with performance. This study used principal component and subsequent multiple regression analysis to investigate the relationship between the movement of the club relative to the delivery plane and clubhead characteristics at ball impact. The principal components generally reflected deviations from an individual swing plane, and lower values of these were associated generally with less variability in the club face impact location. Given a situation in which a golf coach wishes to improve the precision of ball striking, the results from this study suggest that both simplicity of the route and alignment of the club to the final trajectory before impact could be a course of action. However, this does not to suggest 19 technique should be based on a ‘model’ swing plane.

AB - Although the swing plane has been a popular area of golf biomechanics research, the movement of the club relative to the swing plane has yet to be shown experimentally to have a relationship with performance. This study used principal component and subsequent multiple regression analysis to investigate the relationship between the movement of the club relative to the delivery plane and clubhead characteristics at ball impact. The principal components generally reflected deviations from an individual swing plane, and lower values of these were associated generally with less variability in the club face impact location. Given a situation in which a golf coach wishes to improve the precision of ball striking, the results from this study suggest that both simplicity of the route and alignment of the club to the final trajectory before impact could be a course of action. However, this does not to suggest 19 technique should be based on a ‘model’ swing plane.

KW - Motion analysis

KW - kinematics

KW - performance

KW - techniques

KW - golf swing

UR - https://pure.ulster.ac.uk/en/searchAll/index/?search=Analysis+of+the+delivery+plane+in+the+golf+swing+using+1+principal+components&pageSize=25&showAdvanced=false&allConcepts=true&inferConcepts=true&searchBy=PartOfNameOrTitle

U2 - 10.1177/1754337117751729

DO - 10.1177/1754337117751729

M3 - Article

VL - 0

SP - 1

EP - 10

JO - Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology

T2 - Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology

JF - Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology

SN - 1754-3371

ER -