Tour Tempo post, Ochoa vs. Wie at Nabisco

[Augster]

There is little content in this post. Just some observations from last weekend.

CBS did a lot of side by sides between Ochoa and Wie showing how "fast" Wie got done with her swing compared to Ochoa.

As Tour Tempo has told us all the greats, that is most EVERY pro, swings to a 3:1 ratio. Most are 24:8, some are 21:7, some are 27:9. The numbers represent "frames of video" as video is "always" 33 frames per second. So on a 24:8, Tiger Woods for example, he takes it from address to the top in 24 frames (.727 seconds) and from the top to contact in 8 frames (.242 seconds). (Since working with time is a LOT more cumbersome, I'll only be discussing in FPS from now on. A constant of 33 FPS is used)

That 3:1 ratio is for good contact. If it gets to, in a 24:8 swing, 9 frames on the downswing, the golfer is a little late and pushes it. Usually.

So they had the side by sides, Ochoa vs. Wie, and I counted the frames. Ochoa was a WHOPPING 32:8!! A 4:1 ratio! It absolutely takes her FOREVER to get that club back. But she was consistently 4:1. I can't imagine how many bad thoughts would creep into my head taking it back for 32 frames!

Ochoa is a little off of the 3:1 ratio that all the greats have used. But she is consistent with it, and still takes the club through in 8 frames. Thus she generates power. Power is precisely equal to how fast you make that move from the top down to contact, with length the clubhead travels in that time added in.

On the FLIP side, Wie is another character. Her "fast swing" has her taking it back in 18 and TRYING to come back in 6. I say "trying" because it's almost physically impossible for flexible folks to take a club that far back, to parallel, and try to make it down in 6. She was consistently getting down in 7 or 8, but was very consistent with the 18 back.

18:6 is not a ratio they recommend in the Tour Tempo book. It's just too hard to get the club down that fast. I know, I tried. When I first taped my swing, after reading the book, I was consistently 18, but then varied between 7, 8 or 9 on the downswing depending upon how far back I took it. I had more 8's and 9's than 7's and 6's, so I decided to slow my backswing down in order to reach that 24:8. It's taken a while because it seems to take "so long" to get back there now.

Anyway, back to Wie.

I absolutely can't believe Leadbetter is allowing her to try to move the club that fast. I think her trying to get back to the ball "in time" is killing her driver consistentcy. She's just as flexible as Tiger, maybe more so due to her age, and should have no problem at all with a 21:7, or 24:8. She was pushing drives all day, thus the 18:7's. Just a little late. If she hit a fairway, I'm almost sure it'd be because she shortened her backswing just "that much".

Ochoa, with a swing that slow, may go the route of Nancy Lopez, without the "greatness". In the book they say that Lopez was a 24:8 in her hayday, but kept getting slower and slower. Near the end of her career she was like 50:10 or something. I'd have to look it up.

In conclusion, I think Wie will tear up once she either decides to slow her backswing down, even to 21:7, or shorten her backswing up just a little, itty-bitty bit in order to make the 18:6. Over the long haul though, I doubt she could keep an 18:6 swing up. I think there'd just be too much stress and torque on her body, over time, and things would start breaking down.

Granted with all the personal trainers and nutritionists her sponsors are making her utilize, she'll be in tip top condition well into her 20's. And she doesn't have to worry about putting on her Freshman 15 because she's ineligble for college golf.

Thanks for reading. Any questions or comments are welcome as these are observations I felt I "just had to" write, and is only one man's opinion.

 

[Eracer]

The numbers represent "frames of video" as video is "always" 33 frames per second.

Great post.

Just a very small correction. Video is my career, so I'm qualified to say:

NTSC video (the standard in America, and most of the world) is 29.97 frames per second. It is commonly rounded to 30 fps.

PAL video (used in much of the world) is 25 frames per second.

Film is 24 frames per second.

 

[Augster]

Yep, my bad. That's the major reason, besides ease, I wanted to stay with frames. LOL!

Yeah, it's frames of NTSC. We have so many folks from around the world here, I suppose I should have pointed that out also. If they are on PAL, their framing would be a bit different if they videotaped themselves and were counting frames.

It should still be 3:1 though.

Thanks Eracer.

 

[ezra76]

So if I take my swing video and stop it as many times as I can between the takeaway and impact I can get this ratio?

 

[Augster]

Yep.

The easiest way is to have something like V1 home, then just videotape yourself, move it to your computer, and then break down the video frame by frame inside the software. A little less wear and tear on your camera if you have a miniDV tape.

Though, you can just as easily do it with your vidcam and your pause button on your remote. Most digicams' remote have something like frame advance, or super-slow or pressing pause again and again.

So you video-tape yourself. Face-on I find is best as you can see the first frame that the club starts to move back. Make sure you have the camera far enough "back" so that you can see the club all the way to the top.

Videotape yourself and then go to your TV. Get it right up to where you are about to swing. Then start hitting frame advance. Once the club makes it's first move away, that's 1. When it gets to the top, it's FIRST frame that it starts in the other direction is 1 the other way. Stop counting at impact.

There is a reliablity error of +/- 1 frame. Sometimes it's tough to tell which frame is the top end, and the down begin. What you are mainly looking for is consistency. If in 3 swings you have one go 24 back, one 28 back and one 22 back, you have a little problem.

And here's the secret: The tempo is the SAME FOR EVERY SHOT!!! Regardless if it's a half-shot, a driver, a 3/4 wedge, it doesn't matter. ALL your swings should conform to your allotted 3:1 ratio. If you are a 21:7, you shouldn't hit any shots as a 24:8. Your tempo is your swing, your swing is your tempo.

The driver takes the same amount of "time", i.e. frames, as a 115yard PW. The difference is that the driver head travels a HELL of a lot longer distance in the swing than does the PW. But they take the exact same amount of time to execute.

If you have a Tivo or a DVR where you can stop time, ALL of this info is right there for the noticing every weekend, on every tour. It takes a while, but sometimes I'll count Tiger's drive, as they show him face on hitting driver a TON, in real-time and predict where it's going to go based on the counting alone. Then let it play and see if I was right. When he's 24:9, it's going right. 23:8, it's most likely a pull as he got a little "quick". Just some extra fun you can have with a broadcast and a DVR.

You have to really watch at the beginning, because if you take it back correctly, the first 3-5 frames it doesn't look like it's moving at all frame-at-a-time. You just have to start counting button presses when you first see it move. It'll pick up speed in no time.

Counting the 32 for Ochoa takes a lifetime.

The "Tour Tempo" is 3:1 ratios of 21:7, 24:8, and less so, 27:9.

If you want to know more, get the book, "Tour Tempo". It's at most book stores and on Amazon etc. It comes with a CD that has some quicktime movies, and most importantly, some "songs" you can rip to your MP3 player that teach you the correct tempo with a series of timed "beeps" or the voice saying, "Swing, set, through" At the correct times. You hit balls in time with the music. You can also just swing along without hitting balls until it feel more natural.

That is how these great players became great at an early age. Each and every one of them just "happened upon" that tempo for their swing. It was innate. Or it just felt right. Most of us hacks aren't so lucky.

Teaching tempo in this way, as a fundamental, is actually quite new. I think the book is like 2 years old now.

I'd say video-tape yourself first and check your tempo. If you already are near 21:7, or 24:8 etc., don't mess with it. But, if you're like me, with a 18:8 or something, it's just death. Being 2 frames off on the downswing is quite a lot actually.

If you want to save some wear and tear on your camera, get V1 Home for your comp and look at your swing in there. I think they have a free version. CSwing has a free version also. So just to look, it'll cost you nothing.

If you want to break stuff down a little more, get V1 home premium. When you D/L the free version, give them your email. In about a month they send you an email saying you can get the premium version for like $20. The software is actually quite good for the price, and they have a bunch of pro swings, and others, that you can download to do side-by-sides with and check your positions against.

And check their tempos also.

I don't want to ruin the surprise, but the pros in the videos swing at a 3:1 ratio.

 

[Eracer]

Great info here folks. As Augster pointed out, the problem most have is that the consumer video tape decks with which they are playing the swing footage back are not "frame accurate". There is no way to know whether the video is moving back or forth exactly one frame at a time. If you can dump the footage from tape to the computer you're OK, since the computer can easily show you one frame at a time. Another method, for those who have DVD recorders, is to dump the footage onto a DVD and play it back, since all DVD players can perfom a true frame advance.

One more tip - when recording your swing, manually set your camcorder to a shutter speed of at least 1/500 of a second. 1/1000 is better, but that can be a problem on all but a sunny day. No need to go higher than that. This gives you clearer still frames and slo-mo.

 

[Augster]

I can do that? I never thought it possible to adjust shutter speed on my miniDV.

I guess I'll break out the manual before my next taping.

Thanks E.

 

[Eracer]

I can do that? I never thought it possible to adjust shutter speed on my miniDV.

I guess I'll break out the manual before my next taping.

Thanks E.

Yeah - most every camcorder has a manual mode, where you can set shutter speed. Don't forget that you'll need to adjust the iris as well.

"Primer Alert"
Given the same amount of illumination: faster shutter = wider iris needed. The smaller the number, the wider. So f2.4 is wider than f16.

Some camcorders (Canon in particular) have what are called "Priority Modes" They allow you to manually set either the shutter, or the iris, and the camera automatically adjust the other one to maintain proper exposure. These are great, since they allow you creative control without forcing you to worry too much about exposure.

And most camcorders will have modes that attempt to scale the priorities. "Sports Mode", "Night Mode", "Landscape Mode", etc., all favor either fast shutter or wide iris, though these modes never truly lock in a setting. Better than full-auto, by far.

So, in order of preference:

Shutter Priority mode -
Set shutter for 1/1000 and let the camera deal with the iris. Remember that the camera will usually warn you if the iris can't be set wide enough for a particular shutter speed. Dial the shutter back until you don't get the warning.

Manual control -
Set shutter for 1/1000 and open up the iris manually, testing for proper exposure by playing back some test footage.

Sports Mode -
The camera will maintain the (roughly) the highest shutter speed it can, for the illumination present.

I deal with professional gear, and believe me, there are plenty of "professional" videographers out there who don't have a clue about this sort of thing. And the newer consumer camcorders are wonders of technology. They have capabilities that most people never use.

 

[Pa Jayhawk]

I just thought it may be worth mentioning in here. I picked up a $99 Polaroid Recorder. It uses SD cards, which I have an abundance of from other devices. I bought it simply for my golf swing. I don't have kids and never will so I couldn't see spending more than $100 on a recorder for golf. I got to be honest, this works pretty well for golf. You get blurred motion from the club head, it does 30 fps, although I it appears to be more 15fps with 2 exposures at a time. I am an avid photographer, and spend pretty decent money on digital camera equipment, so I will tell you that if you want something for indoors, or to film the kids, or take pictures you will probably be very disappointed in this as an option. The quality is actually what you pay for, and is terrible. If you want a cheap alternative to film your golf swing and save money on lessons and analyzing your own swing, and have some SD Cards laying around, this may be a viable option. It only comes with 16 meg which is insufficient. To do 3 back swings and 3 side swings on one club on the highest setting will use about 16-18 meg. So you could probably get away with a 128 meg card, which is cheap. I just use one from my palm or MP3 Player and it does not overwrite the data. I've had it for about 2 weeks and it already saved me money on at least one lesson.

Again, don't get me wrong, the quality is poor and what you pay for, you really need about 3 swings to see the entire club path as opposed to what may be done in one on a real recorder, it is unusable indoors, but for $99 as opposed to the $300 you would normally spend, it is a decent golf option if you can live with the poor quality. I've used it about 4 times now. It is also very small, about 1/2 the size of a regular recorder. And no, you can't change the exposures.

I do have the Tour Tempo Book as well. Interestingly enough, they always talk about how fast the backswing will seem at first, I have always had to slow mine down to meet the pace or it was fairly close and thought it may be that I wasn't processing it right on the MP3. The camera confirmed that my backswing is faster and not 3:1. Althought he camera read it as more of a 52:20 because of the double exposures and quality, my speed closely matches the 24:8, or is probably more a 21:8 right now.

edit 1 - actually, it registers 60 fps looking more closely, so the double exposures are 30 per second. So mine is probably closer to a 26:10 Although there is almost no movement in the double expose, kind of a pain for having to advance twice, but again, $99. Unless the double exposure has something to do with my software, maybe I will have to check into that further.

 

[Eracer]

I measured my swing with video taken during a round, before I ever read this thread.

Driver 30:9
3-Hybrid 30:9
PW 29:10

A bit slow, but a nice, consistent ratio.

So why am I an 18 handicap? Oh yeah - chipping and putting.

Here's a question for you, Augster - does the same tempo (30 frames of video:10 frames of video, or 1 second : 1/3 second) apply for chipping and putting? I'm going to record some of the Masters and check it.

 

[Eracer]

I measured a lot of the swings during the Masters, and found that the pros were all swinging with a rhythm of around 21:7 to 24:8.

Much quicker than me to the top of their backswing. Does this (along with their strength) explain the distance these guys hit the ball? Do they load the shaft more with that faster backswing?

 

[Pa Jayhawk]

Actually from looking at the book, it would appear alot of the longer hitters fit into the 24/8 catagory. With exception to Daly who is 25/8, I guess he need that extra frame to get the club all the way around to his ankle Woods was actually 27/9 in '97, and went to 24/8 with his swing change. Not sure the stats but wasn't he longer in '97 than '98 and '99 prior to switching swings. I would think the quicker you bring the club back, the quicker the club will load naturally, and vice~versa. That and the fact that the backswing they use to generate is obviously more time consuming on both ends.

 

[Augster]

Ah yes, the Masters. A great time to see swings because they show a ton of them due to only having 4 minutes of commercials per hour. I really should port most of them from my Tivo to my computer in order to have some more swings for my V1 Home. But I'm a lazy bastard, so I can't actually see myself doing it.

Did anyone notice that Tiger is 21:7 now with his driver? He was 24:8 during the writing of the Tour Tempo book. Haney has him going quicker. And he says it's the ball and the new equipment. HAH! He's making the same turn in a faster time frame. More clubhead speed, more power.

Since most all tour pros have just naturally found this 3:1 ratio either by trial and error, or watching and imitating other greats, it thereby MUST be the correct way to load the shaft and make great shots. A little hesitate on the backswing forces a push, a little quick makes you pull.

This is also how they generate so much distance. It is based on how far the clubhead travels in how much time.

Let's say two players are using the same driver. Both have a 24:8 swing. One has a full swing arc of 15 feet, the other 10. (from the top of the backswing to the ball, numbers are for example purposes only). Both of them only take 8 frames to get from the top to the ball. (.27 seconds) So player 1, with the 15 foot arc, is moving the clubhead 15 feet in .27 seconds while player 2 is moving the clubhead only 10 feet in the same .27 seconds. Using a simple formula of Distance=Rate x Time, we get 55 ft/s with 15 feet, and 37 ft/s with the 10 foot swing. (This simple "straight line" formula doesn't take into effect cetrifugal force etc. Just making a simple point.)

So Player 1's clubhead speed is going to be faster which will yield more distance by delivering more force to the ball, everything being equal. The more you turn, and get back to the ball in the same time, the farther the ball goes. OR, you can turn SHORTER, but QUICKER, i.e. 21:7. A person with the 21:7 swing would only have to move the club from the top 12.65 feet in order to create the same 55 ft/s Player 1 from the previous example did.

Pros all use this in most every swing, including chips. Putts, so says the book, should be taken back on the first beep (swing) and hit on the second beep (set). The lenght you want the putt to go determines how far back you take the putter. The stroke is the same length in time. I think most pros do their chips in this 1-2 putter style. I'll have to look at some Masters coverage tonight and see if their chips stay consistent with their putter stroke, which may be the same as their full shot takeaway to top.

If you watch the pros, most all of their shots, pitches, 3/4 etc., stick to their given "time" of 24:8, 21:7 etc. They just have it engrained after so many balls when the "hit" comes after the takeaway. They stick to the rythm and the only adjustment is the distance the clubhead travels.

Pelz unwittingly touched on the correct tempo in his short game bible. He basically said that all of his shots, 7:30, 9:00, 10:30, should all take the same amount of time. He said you should be able to say, "Saawissh, SWISH" on your back and through. It takes a little longer to say Saawissh, as opposed to the one cyllable swish. All in all, each stroke should take about a second. (24:8 is just over a second, 21:7 just under) He never comes right out and says a 3:1 ratio, but I'm sure he knows that now.

Work on it on your short pitches around the green and your chips. It'll help you "slow down". I know I rush my chips all the time, and they are rarely good.

After working with the CD for a while, eventually your body and mind will instinctively know when the "hit" is to occur. It'll know what "time" after you take away the clubhead it should expect to be making contact.

 

[Eracer]

Augster - I think you may have pointed me in the direction of short game salvation. I've always been told that I had really good full swing tempo. I too tend to rush my chips, and am going to work on verbalizing a better tempo on those until I ingrain a smoother short swing. "Sa-wish, swish" it is."

 

[Pa Jayhawk]

Great Post Augster.

I think I may need to start using this on the Practice greens, as I have a tendancy to rush chips sometimes, which usually results in blading the ball. I keep an old small MP3 player in my bag that has just the 24:8 tempo, which is closest to my nature, or at least last year. Never tried it on the practice green though.

Now that I have a camcorder I may have to better evaluate my natural tempo.